Vanstavern v. State, 293 Ga. 123

Vanstavern shot and killed Rush on September 7, 2006 after discovering Rush and Warren on his Carroll County property.
Vanstavern fled the scene with Hopson; Warren fled to the woods; Rush died from a gunshot to the temple and was found seated near Vanstavern’s truck.
Indictment charged five counts: malice murder, felony murder during aggravated assault, aggravated assault, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and possession of a firearm or knife during a crime.
Trial in 2007 resulted in convictions on counts 1, 3, and 5; counts 2 and 4 were not resolved or dead docketed; sentencing followed with count 3 merged for sentencing effects.
During trial, the court inadvertently mentioned the redacted count; the court gave a curative instruction and the defense did not contemporaneously object; movant later challenged on appeal.
Vanstavern filed a motion for new trial; the trial court denied it, and on appeal, the challenged issues were reviewed under Strickland and trial-preservation standards, with the judgment affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence	Vanstavern asserts the evidence was legally insufficient.	State contends the evidence supports a rational verdict.	Evidence was sufficient to support guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Redacted-count remark and curative instruction	Vanstavern contends the mention of a redacted count deprived him of a fair trial.	State argues the error was de minimis and curative instruction cured prejudice; mistrial not required.	No reversible error; trial court's cure was adequate and mistrial not essential.
Ineffective assistance—curative instruction/mistrial choice	Counsel was ineffective for not seeking stronger remedy regarding the redacted count.	Counsel's strategy decisions were reasonable and not prejudicial under Strickland.	No ineffective assistance; Strickland standard not satisfied.
Ineffective assistance—crime-scene testimony objection	Counsel failed to properly object to testimony about victim’s crouching position.	Testimony was within qualified crime-scene reconstruction expert scope.	No deficient performance; testimony within scope.
Ineffective assistance—cross-examination tactics	Counsel erred by eliciting harmful opinion from detective on foregone conclusion.	Cross-examination strategy was a legitimate trial tactic.	No ineffective assistance; strategy falls within reasonable trial judgments.

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency of evidence standard)
Stacey v. State, 292 Ga. 838 (Ga. 2013) (preservation requirement for objections)
Stanley v. State, 250 Ga. 3 (Ga. 1982) (mistrial versus curative instruction discretion)
McCoy v. State, 292 Ga. 296 (Ga. 2013) (trial court discretion; right to fair trial)
Cloud v. State, 290 Ga. 193 (Ga. 2011) (ineffective assistance standard; Strickland analysis)
Phillips v. State, 285 Ga. 213 (Ga. 2009) (reasonable trial strategy; lack of prejudice)
Ford v. State, 290 Ga. 45 (Ga. 2011) (trial strategy and review of counsel decisions)
Chance v. State, 291 Ga. 241 (Ga. 2012) (cross-examination strategy considerations)