Turner v. State
314 Ga. App. 263
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Turner was convicted after a jury trial of aggravated sodomy, two counts of aggravated child molestation, and one count of child molestation of J.D., a minor.
- J.D. is Turner’s sister-in-law and cousin; she resided with Turner and his wife for periods when she was five to seven years old.
- Turner allegedly forced J.D. to perform and receive oral sex, forced anal intercourse, watched pornography, and touched her buttocks.
- The defense challenged a requested jury instruction on credibility of child witnesses.
- Turner argued ineffective assistance of counsel for stipulating to the admissibility of his father’s and his uncle’s prior molestation convictions.
- The trial court denied the credibility instruction and Turner’s motion for a new trial, and the trial court’s decision is at issue on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Credibility instruction for child witnesses. | Turner. | The court’s charge adequately covers credibility principles. | No abuse of discretion; exact language not required. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel regarding admissibility of convictions. | Counsel’s stipulation to admissibility of prior convictions was deficient performance. | Strategic trial decision to explain where knowledge came from; reasonable under the circumstances. | No ineffective assistance; decisions fell within the range of reasonable professional conduct. |
Key Cases Cited
- Cwikla v. Slate, 313 Ga.App. 526, 722 S.E.2d 156 (Ga. 2012) (not reversible error for not charging exact language; adequate charge covered principles)
- Wallace v. State, 306 Ga.App. 118, 701 S.E.2d 554 (Ga. 2010) (affirming standard for reviewing jury-charge refusals)
- Johnson v. State, 276 Ga. 57, 573 S.E.2d 362 (Ga. 2002) (practice on credibility instructions; exact wording not required)
- Robbins v. State, 290 Ga.App. 323, 659 S.E.2d 628 (Ga. App. 2008) (ineffectiveness standard and deference to trial counsel’s decisions)
- Adams v. State, 283 Ga. 298, 658 S.E.2d 627 (Ga. 2008) (reasonable conduct of defense counsel judged from trial perspective)
- Home v. State, 273 Ga.App. 132, 614 S.E.2d 243 (Ga. App. 2005) (general framework for evaluating trial court decisions)
- Wade v. State, 305 Ga.App. 382, 384(2)(a), 700 S.E.2d 827 (Ga. App. 2010) (counsel’s tactical decisions generally protected)
- Sarratt v. State, 299 Ga.App. 568, 570(2), 683 S.E.2d 10 (Ga. App. 2009) (trial counsel not ineffective where several favorable outcomes occurred)