Rozier v. Caldwell
793 S.E.2d 73
Ga.2016Background
- Christopher Rozier was convicted by a jury in 2008 of murder and related offenses; this Court affirmed his conviction in Dyer v. State, 287 Ga. 137 (695 SE2d 15).
- Rozier filed a 2011 habeas petition claiming appellate counsel was ineffective for not arguing that trial counsel was ineffective in several respects.
- The habeas court denied relief finding appellate counsel’s representation was not constitutionally deficient; this Court granted appeal limited to that issue and affirmed.
- Key trial evidence: multiple witnesses tied a shotgun (used in a prior similar transaction) to Rozier; the murder weapon was a 9mm handgun and shell casings from that gun were found and matched to casings from Rozier’s yard.
- Witness Liberty Harris testified for the State pursuant to an immunity agreement and had multiple felony convictions and a pending indictment; defense argued Harris had potential bias (including recidivist-punishment issues).
- The claims on habeas challenged appellate counsel’s failure to raise (1) lack of authentication of a fingerprint card, (2) failure to attack trial counsel’s cross‑examination of Harris about recidivist punishment, and (3) failure to raise trial counsel’s failure to object to a GBI agent’s bolstering testimony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel | Rozier: appellate counsel was ineffective for omitting meritorious trial-ineffectiveness claims | State: petitioner must show deficient omission and reasonable probability of a different outcome; burden is heavy | Court applied Strickland standard and may resolve on prejudice prong; petitioner failed to show prejudice |
| Authentication of fingerprint card used to link Rozier to a shotgun | Rozier: trial counsel should have objected to unauthenticated fingerprint card; appellate counsel was ineffective for not raising that trial error on appeal | State: even if unauthenticated, overwhelming other evidence linked Rozier to the shotgun and to the murder scheme | No reasonable probability of a different appellate outcome; claim of ineffective appellate counsel fails |
| Failure to explore Harris's potential recidivist-punishment bias on cross-examination | Rozier: trial counsel was ineffective for not probing recidivist consequences; appellate counsel ineffective for not raising that claim | State: jury already knew of Harris’s potential bias and record showed cross-examination probed bias; evidence against Rozier was strong | Even assuming deficiency, Rozier cannot show prejudice; appellate counsel not ineffective |
| Failure to object to GBI agent's bolstering testimony | Rozier: counsel should have objected to agent’s testimony that he believed Harris on some matters; appellate counsel ineffective for not raising trial counsel’s failure | State: bolstering testimony was limited, not surprising, and unlikely to have impacted the jury given other strong evidence | No reasonable probability of a different result; no prejudice shown, so appellate counsel not ineffective |
Key Cases Cited
- Thompson v. Brown, 288 Ga. 855 (discusses standard for appellate ineffective-assistance claims)
- Young v. State, 292 Ga. 443 (describing heavy burden on ineffective-assistance claims)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes deficiency and prejudice test)
- Barrett v. State, 292 Ga. 160 (approving resolution of ineffectiveness claims on prejudice prong)
- Rompilla v. Beard, 545 U.S. 374 (reviewing prejudice prong de novo where state court did not address it)
- Hall v. Lewis, 286 Ga. 767 (prejudice analysis requires examining underlying trial-ineffectiveness claim)
- Dyer v. State, 287 Ga. 137 (prior appeal affirming convictions; summarizes trial evidence)
- Jones v. State, 292 Ga. 593 (bolstering objection to law‑enforcement testimony about witness veracity)
- Jackson v. State, 294 Ga. 34 (treatment of cross-examination about possible recidivist penalties)