Winters v. State
305 Ga. 226
Ga.2019Background
- On January 10, 1987, Stephen Gary Jones was shot and killed after an altercation in a bar parking lot; Lori Leary was a passenger and the primary eyewitness.
- Winters approached the Camaro, reached across the passenger seat, said "you owe me," and shots were fired; a .22-caliber gun found in the car caused Jones’s fatal wounds while a .45-caliber was found by Jones’s body.
- Winters was indicted in 2014 and convicted of felony murder (underlying felony: aggravated assault with a deadly weapon) at a 2016 trial; sentenced to life with parole; this appeal followed denial of a motion for new trial.
- Trial disputes: admissibility of Leary’s post-hypnosis testimony, exclusion of a GBI bite‑mark report, and counsel’s handling of an alleged unwritten stipulation and failure to seek mistrial/continuance.
- The jury was heavily exposed to impeachment material about Leary (inconsistent statements, intoxication, memory lapses, admissions about false statements), and the State did not argue Winters bit Leary.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Winters) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for felony murder | Evidence insufficient; Winters acted in self‑defense and who fired first is unclear | Jury could credit Leary and other evidence showing Winters initiated attack and shot Jones | Affirmed — evidence sufficient when viewed in favor of verdict (jury credibility determination) |
| Admissibility of witness’s post‑hypnotic statement | Post‑hypnotic testimony differed from pre‑hypnosis statement and should be excluded | Post‑hypnotic description was the same in substance as pre‑hypnosis; wording need not be identical | Affirmed — trial court did not abuse discretion; substance, not verbatim wording, controls under Walraven/Harp er standard |
| Exclusion of GBI bite‑mark report under public‑record exception | Report needed to impeach Leary and should have been admitted under OCGA §24‑8‑803(8)(C) | Report contained investigative conclusions and no expert laid foundation; State didn’t rely on biting theory | Any error in excluding the report was harmless — record already provided substantial impeachment of Leary and outcome would not likely change |
| Ineffective assistance for relying on unwritten stipulation and not moving for mistrial/continuance | Counsel’s reliance on an unwritten stipulation and failure to seek mistrial/continuance was deficient and prejudicial | Even if deficient, no prejudice because excluded report was cumulative and not critical to outcome | Affirmed — Strickland prejudice not shown; counsel’s conduct did not likely affect the verdict |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
- Walraven v. State, 255 Ga. 276 (hypnotized witness testimony limited to substance of pre‑hypnosis statements)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance two‑prong test)
- Smith v. State, 299 Ga. 424 (harmless‑error standard and de novo harmfulness review)
- Boothe v. State, 293 Ga. 285 (cumulative impeachment makes exclusion of additional impeachment evidence harmless)
- Harper v. State, 249 Ga. 519 (earlier standard for hypnotized witness testimony)