356 Ga. App. 392
Ga. Ct. App.2020Background
- Victims: two girls (ages seven and five) who lived with their mother and stepfather Stephen Alexander; he sexually assaulted both over time, including forced oral sex and vaginal penetration.
- Evidence: younger victim had genital lacerations; Alexander’s DNA was found in her vagina; Alexander’s computer had incest pornography; victims disclosed and were medically examined; mother initially signed a recantation later read to the jury.
- Charges and verdict: Alexander was indicted on multiple counts (rape, statutory rape, aggravated child molestation, aggravated sexual battery, incest, false imprisonment); jury convicted on multiple counts; after merger, sentence was life without parole plus 125 years.
- Post-trial: Alexander moved for new trial arguing ineffective assistance of counsel; trial court denied; Alexander appealed contending four discrete failures by trial counsel.
- Defense theory at trial: the mother’s written recantation and an assertion that the victims obtained and planted semen from a used condom; counsel used cross-examination and strategic choices rather than objecting to certain evidence or testimony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Alexander) | Defendant's Argument (State / Trial Counsel) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Courtroom closure during victims’ testimony and child-interviewer testimony | Counsel failed to object to exclusion of Alexander’s immediate family from courtroom | Closure was permitted by OCGA §17-8-54; counsel did not preserve or reasonably need to object; no prejudice shown | Even assuming deficient performance, no prejudice; closure issue requires contemporaneous objection for structural-error reversal; trial court’s denial affirmed |
| Bolstering by State witnesses (mother’s defense of daughters) | Counsel failed to object to alleged bolstering | Counsel strategically impeached the mother with her written recantation instead of objecting | Strategy was objectively reasonable; no deficient performance shown |
| Jury instruction on victims’ out-of-court statements (recharge omitted explicit reference to victims) | Counsel abandoned objection to the recharge that did not explicitly name victims as “witnesses” for inconsistent statements | Recharge correctly stated law and victims/interviewers were subject to cross-examination; no reasonable possibility of jury confusion | No deficient performance; charge was legally accurate and sufficient |
| Failure to contest State DNA expert’s testimony that DNA was semen | Counsel failed to refute expert’s opinion linking DNA to semen | Defense pursued alternate theory that evidence was planted via a used condom and chose not to contest origin of DNA | Reasonable strategic choice; declining to rebut expert on that point was not ineffective assistance |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes ineffective-assistance standard of deficient performance and prejudice)
- Presley v. Georgia, 558 U.S. 209 (trial courts must consider alternatives before courtroom closure)
- Reid v. State, 286 Ga. 484 (courtroom closure is structural error only if properly objected to; prejudice not presumed in ineffective-assistance context)
- Smith v. Francis, 253 Ga. 782 (state law summary of ineffective-assistance standard)
- Tinson v. State, 337 Ga. App. 83 (victim testimony can suffice to sustain sexual-offense convictions)