Sledge v. State, 312 Ga. App. 97

Sledge was convicted of driving under the influence and driving on a suspended license; acquittals on other charges noted.
The critical issue was whether Sledge received actual or legal notice of his license suspension.
The State relied on a notice form and a driver history showing service on June 5, 2008, but the arresting officer could not recall proper service.
OCGA 40-5-121(a) is strict liability for driving with a suspended license, but notice is required by OCGA 40-5-60.
Service of notice can be by regular mail if not personally served, with revocation effective upon knowledge or legal notice.
The defense argued the notice was not proven; the defense presented a videotape issue and ineffective-assistance claim which the court rejected.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there legally sufficient notice of license suspension?	State shows service occurred (June 5) despite conflicting testimony.	Sledge did not receive actual or legal notice of suspension.	No error; jury could determine notice based on conflicting evidence.
Was defense counsel ineffective for introducing video and for leading questions?	Defense strategy justified by trial context and goals.	Counsel's tactics were ineffective and prejudicial.	Not ineffective; strategy weighed against hindsight; objections were not clearly deficient.

Thompson v. State, 274 Ga. 818, 559 S.E.2d 730 (2002) (treats forms and nomenclature by substance)
Marshall v. State, 229 Ga. 841, 195 S.E.2d 12 (1972) (no magic in nomenclature; substance controls)
State v. Fuller, 289 Ga. App. 283, 656 S.E.2d 902 (2008) (defines notice as actual or legal/constructive)
Hale v. State, 188 Ga. App. 524, 373 S.E.2d 250 (1988) (constructive/implied notice concepts in service)
Norris v. State, 220 Ga. App. 87, 469 S.E.2d 214 (1996) (credibility and conflicting evidence resolved by jury)
Smith v. Francis, 253 Ga. 782, 325 S.E.2d 362 (1985) (standard for evaluating counsel performance under Strickland)
Head v. Hill, 277 Ga. 255, 587 S.E.2d 613 (2003) (deferential review of trial counsel’s performance)
Slade v. State, 270 Ga. 305, 509 S.E.2d 618 (1998) (trial strategy not per se deficient)
Gray v. State, 291 Ga. App. 573, 662 S.E.2d 339 (2008) (trial tactics generally preserved absent abuse)
Earnest v. State, 262 Ga. 494, 422 S.E.2d 188 (1992) (counsel actions presumed strategic)
Stanley v. Zant, 697 F.2d 955 (11th Cir. 1983) ( cited for presumption of reasonable strategy)