Young v. State
328 Ga. App. 857
Ga. Ct. App.2014Background
- Young was convicted of armed robbery and possession of a firearm during a crime; trial followed a motion for new trial.
- Victim identified Young as the gunman at trial; the identification was bolstered by the prosecutor’s demonstration concealing the gunman’s face similarly to earlier concealment.
- Investigator testified to cell phone records showing calls and tower pings near the scene before and after the robbery.
- Defense strategy focused on challenging the victim’s identification and possible mistaken identity.
- Young argues ineffective assistance of counsel; the court reviews Strickland standards and cumulative prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was counsel ineffective for not objecting to bolstering identification? | Young | Young | No reversible error; not ineffective assistance. |
| Was failing to object to leading questions deficient and prejudicial? | Young | Young | No reversible error; strategy supported, no prejudice. |
| Was cell phone location evidence admissible via nonexpert witness and reliable for location? | Young | Young | Admissible; no reasonable probability of different outcome. |
| Were prosecutorial arguments improper and did failure to object amount to abdication? | Young | Young | No ineffective assistance; objections not required for these remarks. |
| Did cumulative error require reversal under Darst and related cases? | Young | Young | No reversible prejudice from cumulative errors. |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. Supreme Court 1984) (defendant must show deficient performance and prejudice)
- Robinson v. State, 277 Ga. 75 (Ga. 2003) (independently apply legal principles to facts)
- Miller v. State, 285 Ga. 285 (Ga. 2009) (prejudice element: reasonable probability of doubt without errors)
- Dyer v. State, 295 Ga. App. 495 (Ga. App. 2009) (trial tactics reviewed for reasonableness)
- Goodwin v. Cruz-Padillo, 265 Ga. 614 (Ga. 1995) (prong analysis required for ineffective assistance)
- Ponder v. State, 201 Ga. App. 388 (Ga. App. 1991) (trial strategy and prejudice standards)
- Owens v. State, 324 Ga. App. 198 (Ga. App. 2013) (collective prejudice analysis for multiple errors)
- Tyner v. State, 313 Ga. App. 557 (Ga. App. 2012) (collective prejudice consideration emphasized)
- Darst v. State, 323 Ga. App. 614 (Ga. App. 2013) (cumulative prejudice not recognized as separate rule)
- State v. Worsley, 293 Ga. 315 (Ga. 2013) (cumulative prejudice standard discussed)
- Perkins v. Hall, 288 Ga. 810 (Ga. 2011) (weighing prejudice from multiple trial deficiencies)
- Schofield v. Holsey, 281 Ga. 809 (Ga. 2007) (collective prejudice considerations in ineffective assistance)