Wallace v. the State, 335 Ga. App. 232

On Nov. 30, 2012 Nathaniel Wallace and co-defendant Shujuan Echols entered a Wal‑Mart; Echols placed items into Wallace’s cart, they bagged items, exited past security, and Wallace left a buggy with merchandise in the vestibule before leaving with Echols.
Store personnel scanned the items after they left and produced an itemized receipt showing a pre‑tax total of $538.73.
Wallace was tried by jury and convicted of felony theft by shoplifting (OCGA § 16‑8‑14) and later received a recidivist sentence based on prior felony pleas.
On appeal Wallace challenged: (1) an alleged improper judicial comment during testimony; (2) the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury that misdemeanor shoplifting could apply to items attributable solely to him if value < $500; (3) admission of the store receipt as proof of felony value; and (4) trial counsel’s effectiveness.
The Court of Appeals reviewed the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, affirmed admission of the receipt, found no improper judicial comment, held no plain error in the charge, and rejected the ineffective‑assistance claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Trial court commented on evidence in violation of OCGA § 17‑8‑57	Court’s clarification of Echols’ reference to Wallace’s nickname expressed opinion on evidence	Court merely clarified witness testimony, not commenting on guilt or credibility	No error — clarification questions not improper comment
Failure to instruct jury that misdemeanor shoplifting could apply to Wallace’s personal share (< $500)	Jury should have been told that if value attributable solely to Wallace was < $500, only misdemeanor applies	Court properly charged on felony, misdemeanor, parties to crime, and sent indictment to jury; failure to give extra instruction did not likely affect outcome	No plain error — charge adequate in context
Admission of store receipt as business record to prove felony value	Receipt inadmissible or insufficient to prove value > $500	Security officer authenticated receipt, testified he had compared items to receipt and it was created contemporaneously per store practice	No abuse of discretion — receipt admissible and sufficient to prove felony value
Ineffective assistance of counsel	Counsel failed to object to receipt, jury charge, and prior convictions used for recidivist sentence	Objections would have been meritless; State proved prior felony pleas and counsel’s performance presumptively reasonable	No ineffective assistance — deficient‑performance and prejudice not shown

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for appellate review of sufficiency of the evidence)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two‑prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Artis v. State, 299 Ga. App. 287 (clarifying that court questions for clarification do not constitute prohibited comments)
Alexander v. State, 294 Ga. 345 (trial court clarification of witness testimony not a § 17‑8‑57 violation)
Hayes v. State, 262 Ga. 881 (failure to make meritless objections is not ineffective assistance)
Alford v. State, 292 Ga. App. 514 (testimony of loss‑prevention/security personnel can establish felony value)
Washington v. State, 285 Ga. 541 (business records admissible where properly maintained and authenticated)
Nash v. State, 271 Ga. 281 (State’s initial burden to prove existence of prior plea and counsel; defendant must show infirmity)