Sims v. State
317 Ga. App. 420
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Sims was convicted by a Henry County jury of two counts of child molestation; the trial court denied a new trial.
- On initial appeal, we affirmed the convictions but remanded for an evidence hearing on ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC).
- On remand, the trial court held Sims could not show IAC, and the denial of a new trial was upheld on appeal.
- The record shows multiple 2004 incidents in which Sims allegedly touched his ten-year-old stepdaughter B. H. and exposed himself.
- The State introduced similar-transaction evidence via Sims’s biological daughter S. S., who testified about molestation in 1991 and Sims pleaded guilty to one count.
- We apply Strickland’s two-prong test for IAC and independently review the trial court’s factual findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contemporaneous limiting instruction on similar-transaction evidence | Sims argues lack of contemporaneous instruction prejudiced him | State asserts final trial instruction sufficed and strategy supports no separate instruction | No error; final charge suffices; no reasonable probability of different outcome |
| Cross-examination of the police investigator | Counsel’s questions opened door to damaging emphasis on similarity | Strategy to neutralize similarities; questioning revealed limits of investigation | No deficient performance; strategy reasonable and effective |
| Introduction of the written police report | Report should have been admitted to show inconsistencies | Counsel used impeachment through cross-examination; report not necessary under law | No deficiency; impeachment accomplished without the report and narrative would not have been admissible under rule |
| Introduction of investigator affidavit | Affidavit would show inconsistencies in initial allegations | Counsel cross-examined and placed inconsistencies before jury; no need to introduce affidavit | No deficiency; cross-examination adequately conveyed inconsistencies |
Key Cases Cited
- Ford v. State, 290 Ga. 45 (Ga. 2011) (trial strategy supported by limiting instruction considerations)
- Copeland v. State, 276 Ga. App. 834 (Ga. App. 2005) (limiting instruction sufficiency and prejudice analysis)
- Breazeale v. State, 290 Ga. App. 632 (Ga. App. 2008) (limits on prejudice for similar transaction evidence)
- Holsey v. State, 281 Ga. 177 (Ga. 2006) (prior inconsistent statements impeachment)