State v. Lexie
331 Ga. App. 400
Ga. Ct. App.2015Background
- Raynard Lexie was convicted by a jury of multiple felonies including aggravated sodomy and sentenced to life; counsel later moved for a new trial alleging ineffective assistance during the plea process.
- The State had offered credit for time served plus 12 years probation in exchange for pleas to two aggravated assault counts; counsel never informed Lexie of the offer before rejecting it by email and later at a hearing.
- At an on-the-record plea hearing Lexie told the court he had not decided; in an off-the-record conference Lexie said he wanted to accept but counsel pressured him to reject the offer, assuring him of acquittal and even saying he would surrender his bar card if he lost.
- Lexie sent a contemporaneous letter expressing he wanted the offer if still open; the prosecutor indicated the offer could be left open for a few days.
- The trial court found counsel’s conduct unreasonable and coercive, concluding counsel failed to advise Lexie properly and pressured him to reject the plea; the court granted a new trial on that ground. The State appealed; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel rendered objectively unreasonable assistance during plea negotiations | Counsel failed to inform Lexie of the plea offer and pressured him to reject it, depriving Lexie of informed choice | Counsel had previously advised Lexie against pleas and believed in a strong defense; thus his advice was reasonable | Held counsel’s performance was deficient: he did not reasonably advise Lexie and actively pressured him to reject the plea |
| Whether Lexie was prejudiced by counsel’s deficient performance (would have accepted plea) | Lexie testified he wanted to accept; he sent a same-day letter expressing acceptance if still open—objective evidence he would have taken the plea | State argued the offer was conditional and may have expired; post-conviction claims are self-serving | Held prejudice shown: reasonable probability Lexie would have accepted and State likely would have honored the offer |
| Whether the trial court’s factual findings merit deference | Trial court found counsel’s promises and conduct not credible and relied on contemporaneous letter and hearing record | State urged different interpretation of record and offer status | Held appellate court defers to trial court’s factual findings unless clearly erroneous and found no clear error |
| Whether the plea offer would have been accepted by court and honored by State | Trial court found no reason the court or State would not have accepted or adhered to the offer; prosecutor indicated it could remain open briefly | State suggested conditional nature meant it expired when rejected | Held appellate court agreed with trial court: no clear error; sufficient evidence offer would have been honored |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-pronged ineffective assistance test)
- Missouri v. Frye, 132 S. Ct. 1399 (plea-offer lapse prejudice standard)
- Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S. Ct. 1376 (application of Strickland to plea bargaining)
- Dulcio v. State, 292 Ga. 645 (counsel must inform defendant of plea offers and consequences)
- Cammer v. Walker, 290 Ga. 251 (defendant must have full and careful advice of counsel)