Washington v. Hopson, 299 Ga. 358

Jason Hopson was tried in Fulton County (Dec. 2004) for rape and related charges; jury convicted him of rape and sentenced him to 15 years.
Evidence at trial included the victim’s testimony and medical evidence; defense argued inconsistencies and consent; jury acquitted on kidnapping charge.
After trial, former Fulton ADA Ashutosh Joshi (the prosecutor) met with Hopson’s family in private practice and was recorded saying he believed witnesses had lied and offering to help for a fee; he later admitted the statements were overstated and were his opinion.
Hopson sought an extraordinary new trial (denied by trial court; affirmed by Court of Appeals) and later filed a habeas petition alleging Joshi knowingly presented false testimony and later solicited Hopson’s family, violating due process.
The habeas court granted relief and set aside the conviction; the Georgia Supreme Court reversed, holding the habeas court’s factual findings that Joshi knew witnesses lied were clearly erroneous and that the post-trial misconduct, while unethical, did not prove a constitutional violation at trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether prosecutor knowingly presented false testimony at trial	Joshi knew the victim and friend lied and therefore Hopson’s due process rights were violated	Joshi only held an opinion based on evidence available at trial; no proof he knew testimony was false	Reversed: habeas court’s factual findings that Joshi knew testimony was false were clearly erroneous; no constitutional Napue/Brady violation shown
Whether Joshi’s post-trial solicitation and conflict of interest created a structural due-process error requiring automatic reversal	Hopson argued Joshi’s financial motive may have existed during trial and tainted prosecution (structural error)	Warden: misconduct occurred after trial; no evidence Joshi contemplated leaving DA’s office or financial motives during trial	Reversed: post-trial ethical misconduct was unscrupulous but occurred after trial; no evidence of conflict during trial and speculation cannot support habeas relief

Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (prosecution must not use false evidence known to be false)
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (prosecutor must disclose materially exculpatory evidence)
Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 (conflict of interest standard and structural-error discussion)
Timberlake v. State, 246 Ga. 488 (standard for extraordinary motion for new trial)
Hopson v. State, 281 Ga. App. 520 (Court of Appeals opinion on trial evidence and conviction)
Hopson v. State, 307 Ga. App. 49 (Court of Appeals opinion addressing Joshi’s post-trial statements and credibility)
State v. Garland, 298 Ga. 482 (standard of review for habeas court factual findings)
Sessions v. State, 293 Ga. 33 (issue preclusion/collateral estoppel principles)