State v. Hodges, 291 Ga. 413

Background

Hines, J. delivers lead opinion reversing the Court of Appeals in Hodges v. State, a justification/self-defense case arising from Hodges’s February 9, 2006 shooting of Turner at Hodges’s home.
Hodges had briefly hosted Turner who had stayed there after a dispute; prior debt-related tensions culminated in Turner threatening with weapons.
Hodges sought to admit evidence that Turner had previously acted violently toward third parties, arguing it showed Turner was the aggressor and supported Hodges’s state of mind.
Two of the three prior incidents were admitted; Hodges sought to admit a third, unsupported incident suggesting Turner had shot at a friend and her daughter.
The trial court excluded the third incident for lack of independent corroboration; the Court of Appeals reversed, finding Chandler-based admissibility proper, which the Supreme Court overturns.
The Court discusses Chandler, Hill, Render, and Harris to explain limits on admitting alleged victim-violence evidence to support a self-defense claim, and notes a statutory evidentiary regime change (OCGA §§ 24-3-2 and 24-4-402).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
May a defendant admit victim’s prior violence against third parties to support a justification defense under Chandler.	Hodges contends such evidence is admissible to show the victim’s aggressor status and support the defendant’s state of mind.	Turner argues Chandler does apply and the evidence is admissible to prove the victim’s violence and defendant’s fear.	No; Chandler-based admissibility is not satisfied here.
Whether the evidence is hearsay or admissible as original evidence under OCGA 24-3-2.	Hodges argues the evidence is original evidence explaining conduct, not offered for truth.	Turner argues it is hearsay or not properly admissible under the original-evidence theory.	Not admissible as a proper application of Chandler/original-evidence rationale in this context.
Whether Hill or Render compel admission of such evidence for state-of-mind purposes.	Hodges cites Hill/Render to support admission to show reasonable fear and state of mind.	Turner relies on Hill/Render to limit or bar such testimony.	Not controlling; the evidence remains generally inadmissible under existing framework, with narrow exceptions.
Whether trial court’s exclusion was reversible error given the substantial other evidence of Turner’s violence.	Hodges argues exclusion was error that affected defense.	State argues exclusion was within the trial court’s discretion and harmless given other evidence.	Exclusion was not reversible error due to the other substantial evidence of violence and the limiting instructions.

Key Cases Cited

Chandler v. State, 261 Ga. 402 (Ga. 1991) (admissibility of specific acts by victim against third parties to prove justification)
Hill v. State, 272 Ga. 805 (Ga. 2000) (limits on victim-violence testimony for state-of-mind when not shown aggressor)
Render v. State, 288 Ga. 420 (Ga. 2011) (discussed applicability of Chandler and OCGA 24-3-2 to prior-acts evidence)
Harris v. State, 279 Ga. 304 (Ga. 2005) (victim previously shot not admissible to support justification; limits on state-of-mind evidence)
Lewis v. State, 270 Ga. 891 (Ga. 1999) (limits on using prior violence to support justification when not proven)