York v. the State
334 Ga. App. 581
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Defendant Abdur Raashidyd York was tried and convicted by a jury for burglary in Gwinnett County based on an April 27, 2011 convenience-store break-in.
- Prosecutors introduced "other acts" evidence over York’s objection: two convenience-store burglaries in Forsyth County on April 28, 2011 involving York, Robinson, and Craig; items recovered included a blue bank bag later identified by the Gwinnett victim.
- Craig pled guilty to the Forsyth County burglaries; law enforcement located burglary tools, gloves, backpacks, cigarette cartons, coins, and a blue bank bag in Craig’s vehicle where York had been a passenger.
- York moved for a new trial and separately moved to dismiss on constitutional speedy-trial grounds; the trial court denied both motions.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed admission of the other-acts evidence under OCGA § 24-4-404(b) and OCGA § 24-4-403, but vacated the speedy-trial denial and remanded for a proper Barker-Doggett analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (York) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of other-acts evidence under OCGA § 24-4-404(b) | Evidence of the Forsyth County burglaries was unduly prejudicial and should be excluded as propensity evidence | Other-acts evidence was admissible to show identity, plan, and connection to the charged burglary; probative value outweighed prejudice because of similarity, temporal proximity, and physical link (blue bank bag) | Affirmed: trial court did not abuse discretion; evidence admissible under 404(b) and 403 balancing given similarity, timing, and connecting physical evidence |
| Motion to dismiss for violation of constitutional speedy-trial right (Barker-Doggett) | Delay between indictment and trial/order (31 months) prejudiced York; dismissal warranted | Trial court found multiple reasons for delay (docket congestion, multiple prosecutors, continuances, defense counsel absence, Forsyth County proceedings) and that York asserted his right late | Vacated and remanded: trial court’s Barker-Doggett analysis was insufficient — it failed to (a) assess whether the delay was uncommonly long in balancing, (b) assign weight/attribution to reasons for delay, and (c) properly evaluate prejudice (including death of an alibi witness occurring during delay) |
Key Cases Cited
- Bradshaw v. State, 296 Ga. 650 (2015) (Georgia adopts federal three-part test for other-acts evidence under Rules 403 and 404(b))
- Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972) (sets four-factor speedy-trial balancing test)
- Doggett v. United States, 505 U.S. 647 (1992) (addresses presumptive prejudice from prolonged delay)
- Porter v. State, 288 Ga. 524 (2011) (trial court must provide sufficient findings under Barker-Doggett)
- Ruffin v. State, 284 Ga. 52 (2008) (describes ad hoc nature of Barker-Doggett analysis and necessity of weighing all factors)
- United States v. Sanders, 668 F.3d 1298 (11th Cir. 2012) (404(b) is a rule of inclusion; extrinsic evidence admissible unless it proves only propensity)
- Hayes v. State, 298 Ga. App. 338 (2009) (length of delay bears on weight of other balancing factors)
- Brown v. State, 287 Ga. 892 (2010) (delay in asserting speedy-trial right can weigh heavily against defendant)
- Redding v. State, 274 Ga. 831 (2001) (witness death during delay can constitute prejudice to the defense)