FI RST DI VI SI ON

DOYLE, C. J.

, PHI PPS, P. J.

, and BOGGS, J.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s /

Jul y 8, 2015



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 5 A0 19 5 . HERRINGTON v . THE STATE.

P H I P P S , Pres i d i n g J u dg e.

W h i l e rep res en t ed b y t ri al co u n s el

, J oh n n y Herri n gt o n was fo u nd g u i l t y o f

p o s s es s i o n o f an i l l eg al weap o n (s awed -o ff s ho t g u n ), 1 g i vi n g fal s e i n fo rm at i o n t o a

l aw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer, 2 an d p o s s es s i o n o f a fi rearm b y a c on v i ct ed fel o n

. 3 He

ap p eal s t he co n v i ct i o ns

, co n t en d i n g t h at t h e tri al co u rt erred by den y i n g h i m t h e ri g ht

1 OCGA § § 16 -1 1-1 21 (5 ) ( p ert i n en t l y d efi n i ng “ s awed -o ff s h o t gu n ” as “ a

s h o t g u n

. . . h av i n g o ne o r m ore b arrel s l es s t h an 1 8 i n ch es in l en g t h o r i f s u ch

weap o n as m o d i fi ed has an ov eral l l en g t h o f l es s t h an 2 6 i n ch es ”); 1 6 -1 1 -1 2 2

(p ert in en t l y

p ro hi bi t i n g t h e p o s s es s i o n o f a s awed -o ff s h o t g u n ).

2 OCGA § 16 -1 0 -2 5 (“ A p ers o n wh o g iv es a fal s e n am e, ad d res s

, o r d at e o f

b i rt h t o a l aw en fo rcem en t offi cer i n t h e l awfu l d i s ch arg e o f h i s o ffi ci al d ut i es wi th

t h e i n t en t o f m i s l ead i n g t h e o ffi cer as t o h i s i d en t i t y o r b i rt hd at e i s g u i l t y o f a

m i s d em ean o r.”).

3 OCGA § 1 6 -1 1-1 31

.t o rep res en t hi m s el f at tri al

, an d b y d et erm in i n g t h a t h e was n o t d en ied effect i v e

as s i s tan ce o f t ri al co un s el . W e affi rm

.

1

. H e r r i ng t o n co nt en d s t h at th e t ri al co u rt erred b y d en y i ng h im t h e ri g h t to

rep res en t h i m s el f at t ri al

. Becau s e Herri n g t o n d i d n o t u n eq u i v o cal ly as s ert t h e ri g ht

t o rep res en t h im s el f b efo re t ri al , t h i s co n t en t i o n i s wi t h o ut m eri t

.

Bo t h t h e fed eral an d s t at e co n s t i t ut i o ns g uaran t ee a c r i m i nal

d efen d an t t he ri g h t t o s el f-rep res en t at i on .[ 4 ] An u n e q u i v ocal as s ert i o n

o f t h e ri gh t to rep res en t on es el f, m ad e p ri or t o t ri al

, sh o u l d b e fo l l o w ed

b y a h eari n g t o en s u r e t h at t h e d efen d an t kn o wi n g l y an d i n t el li g en t l y

wai v es th e ri g ht t o co u n s e l a n d u n d ers t an d s t h e d i s ad v an tag es o f

s el f-rep res en t at i on

. 5

On t he m o rn i n g of t ri al

, b efo re t he ju ry w as i m p an el ed

, an d wh i l e he was b ei n g

rep res en t ed b y co u n s el fro m t h e p u b l i c defen d er’ s o ffi ce, Herri n g t o n an n ou n ced to

t h e co u rt , “ I wo ul d l i k e t o rep l ace m y co u n sel .”

Th e co u rt as k ed H e rri ng t o n wh o h e h ad h i red t o rep l ace h i s at t o rn ey

.

Herri n g t o n rep l i ed

, “ I do n ’ t h av e o n e.” Th e co u rt rep l i ed t h at t h e cas e was g o i n g t o

4 See Fa ret ta v. Ca l i

f o r n i a

, 4 2 2 U. S. 8 06 (9 5 SCt

. 2 5 2 5

, 4 5 LE2 d 56 2 ) (1 9 7 5 );

1 9 8 3 Ga. Co n s t

. , Art . I, Sec. I, Par. XII.

5 Th a xt o n v. S t a t e , 2 6 0 Ga. 1 4 1 , 1 42 (2 ) (3 9 0 SE2 d 8 41 ) (1 9 9 0).

2t ri al th at m o r n i n g

, an d t h at Herri n g t o n co ul d ei t h er rep res en t h i m s el f o r “ b ri n g i n ”

an o th er at t o rn ey . Herri n g to n s ai d , “ I wi l l rep res en t m y s el f.”

Th e co u rt t hen ex p l ai n ed s o m e o f t h e d an g ers o f s el f-rep res en t at i o n

, i n q u i red

as to Herri n g t o n ’ s reas o n s fo r d i s sat i s fact io n wi t h h i s at t o rn ey an d h i s p o s s i b l e

d efen s es t o t h e ch arg es

, an d as k ed t he st at e ab o ut t h e ch arg es i n t h e cas e. Th e co u rt

t h en an n o u n ced :

Yo u m ay fi re [t h e defen s e at t o rn ey ] an d rep res en t y o u rs el f, y ou s ai d y o u

al read y wan t t o d o t h at

, an d t h at ’ s ag ai n s t m y ad v i ce. I am s t r o n g l y

ad v i si n g y o u n o t to

, bu t y o u h av e a l r e ad y t o l d m e y o u d o n ’ t k n o w th e

l aw. Yo u al read y to l d m e y o u d o n ’ t k n o w wh at p o s s i b l e defen s es y o u

h av e.

. . .

W el l

, y o u are t h e b o s s h ere, M r. Herri ng t o n

. Y o u can rep res en t y o u rs el f.

I am n o t g o i n g t o s t o p th at

. I am g oi n g t o ad v is e y o u s t ro n g l y ag ai n st i t

as m u ch as I can an d tel l y o u i t ’ s real l y ag ai ns t m y ad vi ce t h at y o u d o so

.

. . .

Th e co u rt rei t erat e d t h e d an g ers o f s el f-rep res en t at i o n

. Th e fo l lo wi n g t h en

t ran s pi red

.

THE COURT: Ok ay

. Th en y o u are read y t o rep res en t y o u rs el f?

3[HERRINGTON] : I wan t t o k n o w t h at I am g o i ng t o h av e ad eq uat e

rep res en t at i o n.

THE COURT: Yo u h av e g o t ad eq u at e rep res en t at i o n.

[HERRINGTON] : I as k ed [d efen s e at t o r n e y ] t o g et m e a ch an g e o f

v en u e b ecau se o f y o u r b ias t o ward s m e. . . .

. . .

THE COURT: W e are g o i n g t o t ri al t o d ay

. M y o n l y q u es t i o n t o y o u i s

wh et h er y o u wan t t o rep res en t y ou rs el f –

[HERRINGTON] : Do y o u t h i n k y o u can rep res en t m e?

[DEFENSE COUNSEL] : Yes , s ir, I can

.

Th e co u rt t h en i n s t r u c t ed d efen s e co u n s el “ t o g o an d m eet w i t h h i m fo r a few

m o m en t s ,” aft er wh i ch “ we are co m i n g b ack o u t h ere

. . . to t ry t h i s cas e.” Th ereaft er,

w i t h n o m o re d i s cu s s i o n o f Herri n g t o n ’ s t ri al rep res en t at i o n an d w i th t h e s am e

co u n s e l rep res en t i n g Herri ng t o n

, t h e p art i es d i s cu s s ed o t h er p re-t ri al m at t ers

. Th e

cas e p ro ceed ed t o t ri al , wi t h d efen s e co u n s el rep res en t i n g Herri n g t o n

.

“ [Herri n g t o n ] d i d n o t m ak e an u n eq u iv o cal as s ert i o n of hi s ri g h t t o rep res en t

h i m s el f p ri o r t o t h e co m

m en cem en t o f h i s t ri al

. [To t h e ex t en t s o m e o f ] h i s rem ark s

m ay be co n s t ru ed as an ex p res s i o n o f d i s s at is fact i o n wi t h h i s at t o rn ey

, t h ey can n ot

b e co ns t ru ed as an as ser t i o n

, m u ch l es s an u n eq u i v o cal as s ert i o n

, o f hi s ri g h t to

4rep res en t h i m sel f.” 6 To t h e ex t en t Herri ng t o n ex p res s ed at t h e b eg i n n i n g o f t h e

co l l o q u y a d es i re t o r ep res en t h i m sel f, h e t h ereaft er “ ap p aren t l y h ad a ch an g e o f

h eart [, a nd] a ba ndon ed h is req u es t t o rep res en t h i m s el f.” 7 Acco rd i n g l y

, h is co n t en t i o n

i s wi t h o u t m eri t

. 8

2

. Herri n g t o n co n t en d s th at t h e co u rt erre d b y det erm in i ng t h at h e was n ot

d en ied effect i v e as si s t an ce o f t ri al co u n s e l

. H e as s ert s t hat t ri al co u n s el ren d ered

i n effect i v e as s i s t an ce b ecau s e s h e fai l ed to o b ject t o ev id en ce o f two p ri o r

co n vi ct i o n s i n cas es i n wh i ch Herri n g t o n had n ot been rep res en t ed b y co u n s el

. At

i s su e i s t h e s t at e’ s in t ro du ct i o n o f ev i d en ce o f Herri n g t o n ’ s m i s d em ean o r co n v i ct i on s

i n 1 9 9 1 an d 19 9 8 o f g i vi n g fal se i n fo rm at i on (fal s e n am e) t o a p ol ice o ffi cer, wh i ch

ev i d en ce was ad m i tt ed fo r t h e st at ed p u rp o s e o f sh o w i n g Herri n gt o n ’ s i n t en t, b en t o f

6 Th a xt o n , s u p ra.

7 McDo n al d v. S t a t e , 2 96 Ga. 6 4 3 , 6 49 (3 ) (7 7 0 SE2 d 6 ) (2 0 15 ).

8 See Da nen b er

g v. S t a t e

, 2 9 1 Ga. 4 3 9, 4 4 0 -4 4 1 (2 ) (7 2 9 SE2 d 3 1 5 ) (2 0 1 2 )

(t ri al co u rt d i d n o t wro ng fu l l y d en y ap p el l an t ’ s ri g h t t o re p r e s e nt h i m s el f at t ri al

, b ecau s e ap p el l a n t ’s req ues t o n t h e m o rn i n g o f t ri al t o d i sm i s s h is t ri al co u n s el an d

rep l ace t h em w i t h ret ai n ed co u n s el

, a p u b l i c d efen d er, o r hi m s el f, was n o t an

u n eq ui v o cal as s ert i o n o f h i s ri gh t t o rep res en t h i m s el f).

5m i n d or co u rs e o f c o n d u c t

. 9 Th e reco rd do es n o t i n d i cat e t h at Herri n g t o n was

rep res en t ed b y

co u n s el i n ei t her o f t h e p ri o r cas es

.

To p rev ai l o n a cl ai m o f i n effect i v e a s s is tan ce o f co u ns el

,

ap p el l an t m

u s t s ho w co u n s el ’ s p erfo rm an ce w as d efi ci e n t an d t h at th e

d e f i ci en t p erfo rm an ce p reju d i ced h i m to t h e p o i n t th at a reas o n ab l e

p ro b ab i l i t y ex i s ts t h at

, b u t fo r co u n sel ’ s erro rs

, th e o u t co m e o f t h e t ri al

wo u ld h av e b een d ifferen t

. 1 0

On ap p el l at e rev iew o f t h at cl ai m

, we accep t t h e tri al co u rt ’ s fact ual f i n d i n g s an d

cred i b i l i t y d et erm i n at i o n s u n l es s cl earl y erro n eo us , b u t we i n dep en d en t l y ap p l y t h e

l eg al p ri n ci p l es t o t h e fact s

. 1 1

9 See g en eral l y fo rm er OCGA § 2 4 -9 -8 4 .1 (a) (2 ), (3 ) (2 0 1 1 ). Becau s e t h i s cas e

w a s t r i e d p ri o r t o J an u ary 1, 2 0 1 3

, Geo rg ia’ s o l d ev i d en ce co d e ap p l i es h ere. Se e

Br a gg v. S t a te

, 2 9 5 Ga. 6 7 6 , 6 77 , n . 3 (7 6 3 SE2 d 4 7 6 ) (2 0 1 4).

1 0 Ki t ch en s v. S ta t e

, 2 8 9 Ga. 2 4 2

, 2 4 3 (2 ) ( 7 1 0 S E 2 d 5 5 1 ) (2 0 1 1 ) (ci t at i o n

o m it t ed ).

1 1 Od l e v. S t a t e , 3 31 Ga. Ap p . 1 4 6 , 1 5 0 -1 5 1 (7 7 0 SE2 d 2 56 ) (2 0 1 5 ).

6Ev en as s u m i n g t h a t t h e p ri o r co nv i ct i o n s were i n ad m i s s i b l e, 1 2 an d t h at t ri al

co u ns el perfo rm ed d efi ci en tl y b y n o t o b ject i n g t o t h e i n tro d u ct i o n o f s u ch ev i d en ce, 1 3

Herri n g t o n h as n o t s h o wn t h at h e was p reju d i ced t hereb y

. 1 4 In d et erm i n i n g wh et h er

co u ns el ’ s erro r res u l ted i n t h e req u i red p reju di ce,

1 2 S e e C l e n n ey v. S t a t e

, 22 9 Ga. 5 61

, 5 64 (4 ) (1 9 2 SE2 d 9 0 7) (1 9 7 2 ) (ci t i n g

Gi d eo n v. W a i n wr i gh t

, 3 7 2 U. S. 3 3 5 (8 3 SCt 7 9 2, 9 LE2 d 7 9 9 ) (1 96 3 ), an d Bu r g et t

v. Texa s

, 3 8 9 U. S. 10 9 , 1 1 5 (8 8 SCt 2 5 8 , 1 9 LE2 d 3 1 9 ) (1 9 6 7 ), t h e Co u rt h el d t h at

ev i d en ce o f t h e ap p el l an t ’ s p rev i o u s co n v i ct i o n s

, i n wh i ch h e was den i ed th e b en efi t

o f co u ns el

, can n o t b e u s ed ag ai n s t h im ei t her t o s up p ort g u i l t o r en h an ce p u n i s h m en t

fo r an o th er o ffen s e); see al s o S co tt v. S t a te

, 2 50 Ga. 1 9 5

, 1 9 8 (2 9 7 SE2 d 1 8 ) (1 9 8 2 );

Mi t c hel l v. S t a t e

, 13 6 Ga. Ap p

. 3 9 0

, 3 9 1 (3 ) (2 2 1 SE2 d 4 6 5 ) (1 9 75 ) (t h e u s e o f

co n vi ct i o n s co n st i t ut io n al l y i nv al i d u n d er Gi deo n v. W a i n wr i g h t

, s u p ra, i s p ro h i b i t ed

ei t h er t o s u p p o rt g u i lt o r en h an ce p u n i s h m en t fo r an o t h er o ffen s e).

1 3 S e e M i t ch el l

, s u p ra at 3 9 2 (3 ) (ap p el l an t ’ s co n t en t i on t h at t h e s t at e h ad

i m p ro p erl y el i ci t ed ev i d en ce of h i s pri o r co n v ict i o n s w i t ho u t sh o w in g t h at h e ei t h er

h ad co u n s el o r h ad wai v ed co u n s el i n s u ch p ri o r p ro ceed i n gs was n o t rev i ewab l e o n

ap p eal

, b ecau s e d efen s e co u n s el h ad fai led t o o b ject t o t h e ad m i ss i o n o f th e ev i d en ce

i n t he t ri al co u rt ).

1 4 See g e n e r a l l y C

h u r ch v. S t a t e

, 2 1 0 Ga. Ap p

. 6 7 0

, 6 7 2 (4 ) (4 3 6 SE2 d 8 0 9 )

(1 9 9 3) (reject i n g ap p el l an t ’ s B u r g et t v. Texa s

- b as ed arg u m en t t h at t h e t ri al co u rt h ad

erred i n co n s i d eri n g h er p ri o r u n co u n s el ed co nv i ct i o ns i n se nte nc in g

, wh ere th ere was

n o co n t en t i o n t hat t h e co u rt h ad s en t en ced h er in co n ju n ct i o n w i t h th e p rev i ou s

co n vi ct i o n s ); Mi l l er v. S ta t e

, 2 9 6 Ga. 9, 1 2-1 3 (4 ) (b ) (7 6 4 SE2 d 8 2 3 ) (2 0 1 4 )

(affi rm i n g t ri al co u rt ’ s reject i o n o f ap p el l an t’ s i n effect i ve as s i s t an ce cl ai m

, s t at i n g:

“ As s u m i ng t h at [t h e h ears ay ] ev i d en ce w as i n ad m i s s i b l e.

. . , [ap p el l an t ] h as n ot

s h o wn h o w h e was p reju d i ced ”; t h e ev i d en ce co m p l ai n ed o f w as cu m

u lat i ve o f o t h er

t es t i m o ny

, an d t he ev i d en ce t h u s s u p p o rt ed t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s co n cl u s i o n th at t h ere was

n o reas o n ab l e p ro b ab i li t y t h at t h e fai l u re o f d efen s e co u n s el t o o b j ect t o t h e ad m i s s i o n

o f t h e ev i d en ce at i ss u e affect ed t h e o u t co m e o f t h e t ri al ).

7a co urt h eari n g an i n effect i v en es s cl ai m m u s t co n s i d er th e t ot al it y o f th e

ev i d en ce b efo re th e ju d g e o r ju ry

. So m e o f t h e fact u al fi n d i n g s wi ll h av e

b een u n affect ed by t h e erro rs

, an d fact ual fi n d i n g s t h at were affect ed

wi l l h av e been affect ed i n d ifferen t way s

. So m e erro rs w i l l h av e h a d a

p erv as i ve effect o n t h e i n feren ces to b e d rawn fro m t h e ev id en ce,

al t eri n g t h e en t i re ev i d en t i a ry p ict u re, an d s o m e wi l l h av e h ad an

i s ol at ed

, t ri v i al effect

. M o reo v er, a v erd i ct o r co n cl us i o n o nl y we a k l y

s u p p o r t ed b y t h e reco rd i s m ore l i k el y t o h av e been affect ed b y erro rs

t h an o n e wi t h ov erwh el m i n g reco rd s u pp o rt

. Tak i n g t h e un affect ed

fi nd in g s as a g i v en

, an d t ak i n g d u e acco u n t o f t h e effect o f t h e erro rs o n

t h e rem ai n i n g fi nd i n g s

, a co u rt m a k i n g t he p reju d i ce i n q u i ry m u s t as k

i f t h e d efen d an t h as m et t h e b u rd en o f s ho wi n g t h at t h e d eci s i o n reach ed

wo u ld reas o n ab l y

l i k el y h av e b een d ifferen t ab s en t t h e erro rs

. 1 5

Vi ewed i n t h e l i g ht m o s t fav o rab le to t h e v erd i ct

, 1 6 t h e t ri al ev i d en ce s h o wed

t h e fo l l o wi n g

. A law en fo rcem en t o ffi cer t es t i fi ed th at on M arch 29

, 2 0 11

, h e an d

o t h er o ffi cers h ad g o ne t o an ad d res s l o o k i n g fo r a fu g i t iv e s ex o ffen der, N. B., aft er

h av in g b een i n fo rm ed t h at N

. B. was l i vi n g in a t en t o n t h e p ro p ert y . W h en o ffi cers

1 5 S t r i ckl a n d v. W

as h in g t o n , 4 6 6 U. S. 66 8

, 6 9 5 -6 96 (III) (B) (1 0 4 SCt 2 0 5 2,

8 0 LE2 d 6 7 4 ) (1 9 8 4 ).

1 6 See S ca nd r e t t v

. S t a te

, 2 9 3 Ga. 6 0 2 (1 ) (7 4 8 SE2 d 8 6 1 ) (2 0 1 3 ) (wh ere t h e

o n l y i s s ues o n ap p eal fro m cri m i n al co n v i ct io n were w h et h er t h e t ri al co u rt h ad

ad m i t t ed i m

p ro per ev i den ce an d t h e ap p el l an t h ad recei ved i n effect i v e as s i s t an ce o f

t ri al co u n s el

, t h e Co u rt v i ewed t h e e v i d e n c e i n t h e li g ht m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e

v erd i ct ).

8arri v ed

, t h ere was no t en t on t h e p ro p ert y

, bu t t h ere w as a h ou s e an d a t rai ler. Offi cers

wen t t o t h e t rai l er t o in q u i re ab o ut N

. B. Th ey k no ck ed o n t h e d o o r an d

, a few

m i n u t es lat er, Herri ng t o n an s wered i t

. Herri n g t on ex pl ai n ed t h at he h ad b een as l eep

,

a n d h e ap p eared as t h o u g h he h ad ju s t awak en ed

. W h en as k ed i f h e k new N. B.,

Herri n g t o n rep li ed t h at he d id

, t h o u g h h e h ad no t seen h i m i n “ a li t t l e wh il e, a co u p l e

o f week s

, m ay

be.” H erri n g t o n s t at ed t h at h e was al o n e i n t h e t rai l er. Offi cers as k ed

Herri n g t o n t o id en t i fy h i m sel f, an d Herri n g t o n h an d ed an o f f i c er an i d en t i fi cat i o n

card b eari n g t h e n am e “ J effrey Cu rv i n .” In th e o ffi cer’ s o p in i o n, t he p h o t o g rap h o n

t h e i den t i fi cat io n card di d n o t res em b l e Herri n g to n an d

, wh en t h e o ffi cer as k ed

Herri n g t o n fo r t he d at e o f bi rt h o n t h e card

, h e was u nab l e t o p r o v i d e i t

. An o t h er

o ffi cer was cal l ed t o th e s cen e, an d h e was ab le t o i d en t ify Herri n g t o n, wh o m h e h ad

k n o wn fro m

an en co u n t er “ a week p ri o r.”

Th e o ffi cers search ed t he t rai l er to co n fi rm t h at N. B. was n o t p res en t

. O n l y o n e

b ed ro o m i n t h e t rai l er h ad el ect ri cal p o wer an d was h ab i t ab l e; t h e b ed in t h at b ed ro o m

ap p eared t o h av e b een s lep t i n

. On t h e b ed

, in p l ai n s i g h t

, was a b an k b ag

. Th e b arrel

o f a s h o t g u n was s t i ck in g o u t o f t h e b ag

. Th e barrel w as 7 1 / 4 i n ch es l o n g

, a n d t h e

e n t i re fi rearm was “ [r] i g ht at a fo o t l o ng .” Th e s h ot g u n co n t ai ned t h e n ec e s s a r y

9wo rk i n g p art s

. Herri ng t o n t o l d t h e o ffi cers t h at t h e s ho t g u n was n o t h i s

, st at i n g t h at

o n e o f t h e o ffi cers m

us t h av e “ p l an t ed i t o n ” h i m

.

Th e m an wh o o w n ed t h e p r o p ert y an d t h e t rai l er, T. D., t es t i fi ed t h at

Herri n g t o n h ad b een d o i n g ren o v at i o n w ork o n t h e t rai l er i n M arch 2 0 1 1, an d t h at h e

h ad g i ven Herri ng t o n p erm i s s i o n t o s t ay i n t h e t rai l er. T h e o wn er t es t i fi ed t h at h e

(T. D.) h ad n ot s t o red an y b e l o n g i ng s

, i n cl u d i ng an y fi rearm s

, i n t he t rai l er. Th e

t rai l er h ad b een em

pt y , b u t Herri n g t o n “ h ad b een b ri n g i n g s o m e t h i n g s i n .”

Tak i n g t h e s t an d i n h i s o wn d efen s e, Herri ng t o n t es t i fi ed t h at J effrey Cu rv in

(wh os e i d en t i fi cat i o n card h e had h an d ed t o offi cers as p ro o f o f h i s o wn i d en t i t y ) was

h i s co u s i n ’ s s o n ; t h at t h e i d en t i fi cat i o n card was n o t h i s; an d t h at N. B. h ad fl ed o ut

t h e t rai ler’ s b ack d o o r as th e o ffi cers arri v ed o r u p o n l earn i ng t h at t h ey were en ro u t e.

Herri n g t o n t es t i fi ed t h at h e h ad b een h es i t an t t o op en t h e t rai ler d o o r fo r t he o ffi cers

b ecau s e h e was afrai d t h ey wan t ed h i m fo r a p ro b at i o n vi o l at i o n; h e d id no t o wn an d

d i d n o t k n o w wh o o wn ed t h e s h o t g un ; an d h e h ad n o t s een t h e sh o tg u n b efo re t h e

o ffi cers s h o wed i t t o hi m

. H erri n g t o n t es t i fi ed t h at h e h ad been co n v ict ed i n 2 0 0 5 fo r

fl eei n g an d el u d in g o ffi cers ; an d

, h e ad ded

, “ I’ v e g o t a cri m i nal reco rd an d I’ v e d o n e

t h i n g s t h at

, y o u kn o w, I am n o t p ro u d o f, b u t I’ v e d o n e m y ti m e. I’ v e

. . . p led g ui l t y

fo r t h e t hi n g s t hat I k no w I was g u il t y o f an d I d id m

y t i m e fo r t h em .”

10Gi v en t h e ev i d en ce i n t h i s cas e

, t h e r e i s n ot a reas o n ab l e p ro b ab il i t y t h at t h e

o u t co m e o f Herri ng t o n ’ s t ri al wo u l d h av e b een d ifferen t h ad co u n sel o b j e ct ed to

ev i d en ce o f t h e t wo p ri o r f a l s e i n fo rm at i o n co n v i ct io n s an d h ad th e co u rt ex cl u d ed

s ai d ev i d en ce. 1 7 Acco rd i n g l y

, Herri n g t o n ’ s i n effect i v e a s s i s t an ce o f co u n s el cl ai m

fai l s

. 1 8

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Do yl e, C. J., a n d

Bo g g s , J., co ncu r

.

1 7 See g en eral l y Mi l l er

, s u pra; We l l s v

. S t a t e

, 2 9 5 Ga. 1 6 1

, 1 6 6 (2 ) (a) (7 5 8

SE2 d 5 9 8) (2 0 1 4).

1 8 See W el l s , s u p ra at 1 6 6 (2 ) (b ).

11