SECOND DI VI SI ON

BA RNES, P. J.

, BOGGS and RI CKM A N, JJ.

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 l s .us /r ule s

Jul y 5, 2016



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 6 A0 55 0 . THE STATE v . ENICH.

B O G G S , J u d g e.

Th e St at e ap p eal s fro m t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er g ran ti n g Eu g en e En ich ’ s m o t i o n

fo r n ew t ri al o n th e g ro u n d t h at En ich s ho u l d h av e b een al l o wed t o im p each a

p ro s ecu ti o n wi tn es s wi t h ev i den ce o f h er p en d i ng fi rs t o ffen d er p ro b at i o n

. Th e St at e

co n ten d s t h at a n e w t ri al s ho u l d n o t h av e b een g ran t ed b ecau s e t h e ev i d en ce was

p ro p erl y ex cl u ded at t ri al

, an d th at i n an y ev en t t he erro r w as h arm l es s

. W e fi n d t h at

t h e t ri al co u rt di d n ot ab u s e i t s d i s cret i o n i n d et erm i ni n g th at t h e ex cl u d ed ev i d en ce

s h o u l d h av e b een ad m i t ted t o sh o w t h e wi t n es s’ b ias

, an d t h at th e u n d erl y i n g er r o r

was n ot h arm l es s

. W e t h erefo re affi rm t h e g ran t o f a n ew t ri al

.

En i ch was t ri ed an d co n v i ct ed o f t wo co u n ts o f rap e a n d t w o c o u n t s o f ch i ld

m o l e s t a t i o n

. Th e ev i d en ce p res en t ed at t ri al s h owed t h at

, i n 2 0 0 9, En ich

, wh o i sm en t al l y ch al l en g ed

, 1 m o v ed in w i t h t h e vi ct i m an d t h e v ict i m ’ s m o t h er, wh o was

d es i g n at ed t h e p ay ee o n En i ch ’ s So ci al Secu ri t y d i s ab i l i t y b en efi t s

. Sh e recei v ed a

l u m p su m o f ap p ro x i m at el y $2 ,0 0 0

, an d m o nt h ly p ay m en t s o f b et ween $ 4 0 0 an d $ 7 0 0

t h e r e aft er. At s o m e p o i nt

, En i ch ’ s cas e was reev al uat ed an d t h e p ay m en t s s t o p p ed

.

A w i t n es s t es t ifi ed t h at En i ch an d t h e m ot h er h ad a fal l i n g o ut i n earl y 20 1 0

, an d

En i ch cal l ed th e wi t n es s t o co m e p i ck h i m u p ; t h e m ot h er cal l ed t h e wi t n es s an d t o ld

h er t h at En i ch h a d a c c u s e d her o f “ g et t in g hi s as s i s t an ce.” A few d ay s l at er, aft er

En i ch ret u rn ed t o t h e m o th er’ s ho u s e, h e w as ch arg ed wi t h rap e an d ch i ld m o l es t at i o n

aft er t h e m o t h er cal led t h e p o l ice an d t o l d t h em En ich h ad t ri ed t o rap e h er d au g h t er.

Th e m o t h er ack n o wl ed ged t h at s h e an d En i ch h ad q u arrel ed reg ard i ng h er us i n g s o m e

o f h i s b en efi t s t o pu rch as e h er car, a n d s h e ack n o w l ed ged t hat s h e was h av i n g

fi nan ci al d i ffi cu l t i es

, al t h ou g h s h e d en i ed t h at “ i t cau s e[d ] i s s u es aro u n d t h e h o u s e.”

Du ri n g t h e t ri al

, t he t ri al co urt refu s ed t o al l ow En i ch t o i n t r o du ce ev i d en ce

t h at t h e v i ct i m ’ s m o t h er was s erv i n g a fi rs t o ffen d er p ro b at i o n fo r fo rg ery an d t h eft

b y recei v i n g

. Th e t ri al co u rt ack n o wl ed g ed t h at E ni ch was en t i tl ed t o i n t r o d u c e

ev i d en ce o f an u l t eri o r m o t i ve or t h at t h e wi t n es s was at t em p ti n g t o “ p u n i s h [] ” En i ch

1 Ev i d en ce was i n tro d u ced fro m a t es t in g p sy ch o l o g i s t t h at h i s “ fu l l s cal e IQ”

was 6 4. Th e wi t nes s des cri bed En i ch as “ m i l d l y m en tal l y ch al l en g ed ,” wi t h a m en t al

ag e o f b et ween 1 1 an d 1 4 y ears

.

2b y cau s i ng h e r d a u g h t er t o accu s e h i m

, b u t ru l ed t hat he co u ld n o t u s e h er fi rs t

o ffen d er s t at u s t o d o s o.

En i ch m ad e a p ro ffer at t ri al t h at i n l at e 2 0 0 9, t h e m o t h e r was i n s i g n i fi can t

fi nan ci al d i ffi cu l t i es

, an d al l eg ed l y p o s ses s ed st o l en p ro p ert y

, p as s ed fo rg ed ch eck s

,

an d ap pl i ed fo r cred i t i n t h e n am e o f o t h ers i n Sep t em b er, Oct o b er, an d No v em b er o f

2 0 0 9

. On M ay 1 9

, 2 0 1 1

, t h e m o t h er was ch arg ed by accu s at i o n w i t h t wo co u n t s o f

fo rg ery i n t h e fi rs t d eg ree, i d en t i t y frau d

, an d t h eft b y recei v i n g s t o len p ro p ert y

,

ari s in g o u t o f t he 2 0 0 9 i n ci d en ts

. On Au g u s t 5

, 2 0 1 1

, s h e p l ead ed g u i l ty to o n e co u nt

o f fo rg ery an d t h eft b y recei v i n g

, an d o n Au g u s t 3 0

, 2 01 1

, s h e was s en ten ced t o fi v e

y ears o f p ro b at io n u nd er t h e Fi rs t Offen d er Act

. En i ch ’ s t ri al t o o k p l ace i n m i d

Oct o b er o f 2 0 11

.

En i ch ’ s am en d ed m o t i on fo r n ew t ri al was h eard aft er t h e reas s i g nm en t o f t h e

cas e t o a s u cces s o r j u d ge. At t h e h eari n g o n t h e m o ti o n

, t h e s u cces s o r ju d g e recei v ed

ev i d en ce reg ard in g En ich ’ s co m p et en ce 2 an d h eard t es t i m o n y fro m En i ch reg ard i n g

t h e h an d l i n g o f h i s cas e. En i ch ’ s t ri al co u ns el al s o tes t ifi ed at l en g t h wi t h reg ard to

t h ei r p rep arat i o n s fo r t ri al an d t hei r t h eo ry o f t h e cas e. T h ey b el i ev ed th at wh en En i ch

2 En i ch ’ s t ri al co un s el t es t i fi ed t h at t h ey so u gh t a co m p et en cy he a r ing a nd E nic h

was fo un d co m

p et en t t o s t an d t ri al fo r th e ch arg es

. Ev id en ce reg ard i n g En i ch ’ s

co m p et en ce was ex cl u d ed at t ri al

.

3accu s ed t h e wi t n es s o f s t eal i n g h i s b en efi t s

, s h e im m ed i at el y p urs u ed t h e ch arg es

ag ai n s t h i m i n o rd er t o d i v ert t h e St at e’ s at t en t i o n fro m E n i ch ’ s accu s at i o n an d to

a v o i d p o s s i b le rev o cat i on o f h er fi rs t o ffen d er s t at u s fo r co m m i tt i ng an ad d i t i o n al

t h eft “ b ecau s e rap e i s a l o ud er wo rd t h an t h eft .”

In i t s o rd er g ran t i n g a n ew t ri al

, t h e tri al co u rt co n c lu d ed t h at En i ch s h o u ld

h av e b een al l o we d t o p res en t ev i d en ce o f th e m o t h er’ s p en di n g fi rs t o ffen d er

s en t en ce, b ecau se i t s ho wed bi as i n t h at s he h ad a m o t i v e “ t o p u n i s h [t h e] accu s ed o r

e l i m i n at e h i s ab i l i t y t o cau s e [h er] t ro ub l e i n t h e fu tu re” b y i nd u ci ng h er ch i l d t o

accu s e hi m

. Th e co u rt reas o n ed t h at i f t h e ju ry h ad b een m ad e aware of th e m o t h er’ s

cri m i n al co n d u ct “ wh i ch i n v o l v ed m is ap p ro p ri at i o n o f t h e fu n d s o f o t h ers ” i t co u ld

h av e creat ed a reas on ab l e d o u bt as t o En i ch ’ s g u i l t

.

1

. W e fi rs t co ns i d er t h e ap pro p ri at e s t an d a r d of rev i ew. 3 “ [T] h e fi rs t g ran t o f

a n ew t ri al o n s p eci al g ro u n d s i n v o l v i n g a q u es t i o n o f l aw is rev i ewab l e i n a p ro p er

ap p eal .” (Ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i tt ed

. ) O’Nea l v. S t a te

, 28 5 Ga. 3 6 1

, 3 6 3 (6 7 7

SE2 d 9 0 ) (2 0 0 9 ).

3 Th e St at e’ s b ri ef d i d no t i n cl u d e a s tat em en t o f t h e ap p l i cab l e s t an d ard o f

rev i ew, as req u i red b y

Co u rt o f Ap p eal s Ru l e 2 5 (a) (3 ).

4W h ere, as h ere, an ap p eal fro m t h e g ran t o r d en i al o f a m o t i on fo r a new

t ri al i n vo l v es a m i x ed q u es t i o n o f l aw an d fact

, we em p l o y t wo d ifferen t

s t an dard s o f rev i ew. W e rev i ew d e n o vo t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d eci s io n as t o

an y q u es t io n s o f l aw, w h i l e ap p l y i n g t he cl earl y erro n eo u s s t an dard o f

rev i ew to an y fact u al fi n d i n g s m ad e b y t h a t c o u rt

. In Geo rg i a, i t i s

wel l -s et t l ed t hat t h e “ cl earl y erro n eo u s ” s t an d ard fo r rev i ewi n g fi n d i n g s

o f fact i s eq u i v al en t t o t h e h i g hl y d eferen t i al “ an y ev i d en ce” tes t

. Th us

,

we wi l l up h o l d t he t ri al co u rt ’ s fact u al fi nd i n g s i f t h ere i s an y ev i d en ce

t o s u pp o rt th em

, an d we d efer to th e tri al co u rt ’ s cred i b i l i t y

d et erm i nat i o n s.

(Ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) W ed el v. St a t e

, 3 2 8 Ga. Ap p

. 2 8 (7 6 1 SE2 d 4 5 4 )

(2 0 1 4) (ri g h t o f defen d an t t o be p res en t ). Co m p are S t a t e v. Ol i ver

, 3 2 6 Ga. A p p

. 7 5 9,

7 6 1 -7 6 2 (2 ) (7 5 5 SE2 d 29 3 ) (2 0 1 4 ) (wh en su b s t i t u t e tri al j u d ge tre a t s ev i d en ti ary

q u es ti o n as “ p urel y l eg al i s s ue, an d h e d i d n o t recei v e an y ev i d en ce o r m ak e an y

fi nd i ng s o f fact ,” d e n ov o s t an d ard ap p l i es

. ) H e r e

, t h e s u cces s or ju d g e h eard

t es t i m o ny fro m tri al co u n sel an d fro m En i ch h i m s el f, an d m ad e fi nd i n g s o f fact

. W e

t h erefo re ap p l y

t h e d u al s t an d ard o f rev i ew as o u t l i n ed i n W ed el

.

2 . W i th t h i s s t an d ard i n m i n d , we t u rn t o t h e i s s u e p res en t ed h ere.

Th e s u cce s s fu l co m

p l et i o n o f p ro b at i o n as a fi rs t offen d er s h al l n ot be

co n s i d ered a cri m i n al co n v i ct i o n a n d c an n o t b e u s ed t o i m p each a

wi t n es s on g en eral cred ib i l i t y g ro u n d s . Becau s e fi rs t o ffen d er s tat u s i s

n o t co n s i dered an ad

j u d i cat i o n o f g u i l t

, a wi t n es s al s o m ay n o t b e

5i m

p each ed o n g en eral cred ib i l i t y g ro u n d s wi t h a fi rs t o ffen d er s en t en ce

t h at i s cu rren t l y b e i n g s erv ed

. W hen t h e i m p each m en t i s t o s h o w bi as

,

h o wev er, we h av e p rev i ou s l y h el d t h at t h e Co n fro nt at i o n Cl au s e o f th e

Si x t h Am en d m en t p erm i t s a d efen d an t i n a cri m i n al c a s e t o

cro s s-ex am in e wi t n es s es ab o u t t h ei r fi rs t o ffen der st at us

. Th e Si x t h

Am en dm en t ri g ht o f co n fro n t at i o n i s n o t ab so l u t e, an d tri al co u rt s ret ai n

b ro ad d is cret i on to i m

po s e reas o n ab l e l i m i t s o n cro s s -ex am i n at i on t o

av o i d h aras s m en t

, p reju d i ce, co n fu s i on

, rep et it i o n

, o r i rrel ev an t

ev i d en ce.

(Ci t at i o n s an d p un ct u at i on o m i t t ed .) S a nd er s v. S t a t e

, 2 9 0 Ga. 44 5

, 4 4 6 (2 )

(7 2 1 SE2 d 8 3 4 ) (2 0 1 2 ). See al s o Mel s o n v. St at e

, 2 6 3 Ga. Ap p

. 6 4 7, 64 8 (2 ) (5 8 8

SE2 d 8 2 2) (2 0 0 3).

By m ean s o f s u ch cro s s -ex am in at i o n

, t h e d efen dan t i s en t i t l ed t o at tack

t h e cred i b il i t y o f t h e wi tn es s b y s h o wi n g t h at t h e p en d in g ch arg es rev eal

a p o s s i b l e b i as

, p reju d i ce, o r u l t eri o r m o t i v e o n t h e p art o f t h e wi t n es s

t o g i v e u n t ru t h fu l o r s had ed t es t i m o n y i n an effo rt t o p leas e t he St at e.

Wh et h er t h e wi t n es s i s t es t i fy i n g p u rs u an t t o a d eal wi th t he St a t e

rel at in g t o t h e pen d i n g ch arg es i s n o t cru ci al to t h e ri gh t t o co n d u ct s u ch

cro s s-ex am in at i o n. Rat h er, t h e d efen d a n t i s en ti t l ed to s h o w b y

cro s s-ex am in at i o n t h at t h e wi t n es s m ay b e s had i n g h i s tes t i m on y i n an

effo rt t o cu rry fav or fro m t h e St at e. A d es ire t o co o p erat e m ay b e fo rm ed

b en e a t h t h e co n s ci o u s l ev el

, in a m an n er n o t ap p aren t ev en t o th e

wi t n es s

, b u t s uch a su b tl e d es i re t o as s i s t t h e St at e nev ert h el es s m ay

cl o u d p ercep t i o n

.

6(Ci t at i o n s an d p un ct u at i on o m i t t ed .) S co t t v. S t a te

, 2 4 2 Ga. Ap p

. 8 5 0

, 8 5 1 -8 5 2 (5 2 7

SE2 d 2 1 0 ) (1 9 9 9 ) (fi rs t offen d er p ro b at i on ), ci t i n g Hi n es v. S t a t e

, 2 49 Ga. 2 5 7

, 2 6 0

(2 ) (2 9 0 SE2 d 9 11 ) (1 98 2 ) ( p en d i n g cri m i n al ch arg es ). “ W h i l e ev i d en ce ab o u t t h e

p l ea was i n ad m i s s ib l e fo r i m p each m en t p u rp o s es

, i t was ad m i s s i b l e t o s h o w p o t en t i al

b i as i n fav o r o f t h e [S] t at e w h il e t h e v i c t i m w a s st i ll o n p ro b at i o n un d er t h at p l ea.”

(Ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Ch ri s t o p her v. S t a t e

, 3 1 4 Ga. Ap p

. 8 0 9

, 8 1 4 (4 )

(7 2 6 SE2 d 4 1 1 ) (2 01 2) (p h y s i cal p reced en t o nl y ). An d wh en a t ri al co u rt “ cu t [s ] o ff

i n li mi n e al l i n q ui ry o n a s u b j ect wi t h res pect t o wh ich t h e d efen s e was en t i t l ed t o a

reas on ab l e cro s s -ex am i n at i o n ” i t i s “ an ab us e o f d i s cret io n an d p re j u d i ci al erro r.”

(Ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Hi n es , s u p ra, 2 4 9 Ga. at 2 6 0 (2 ).

W e n o t e t h at

, i n t h e co n t ex t o f an un s ucces s fu l cl ai m o f i n effect i v e as s i s t an ce

o f co u n s el

, we h av e s u g g es ted t h at p o ten t i al i m p each m en t fo r b ias i s l im it ed t o cas es

i n wh i ch “ t h e wi t n es s m ay h av e recei v ed s p eci al

, fi rs t o ffen d er t reat m en t i n ex ch an g e

fo r t es t i m o n y fav o rab l e t o t he St at e.” Cr a p p s v. S ta t e

, 3 29 Ga. Ap p

. 8 20

, 82 9 (3 ) (c)

(7 6 6 SE2 d 17 8 ) (2 0 1 4 ). 4 Bu t t h i s s t at em en t w a s d i c t a

, becau s e in Cr a p p s we

co n cl u d ed t h at an y a t t e m p t t o i m p each t h e w i tn es s w o u l d h av e b een m erel y o n

4 Su ch a h ol di n g w o ul d co n fl i ct wi th o u r Su p rem e Co u rt ’ s obs erv at i on i n Hi n es

,

s u p ra, t h at “ [w] h et h er o r n o t s u ch a d eal ex i s t ed i s n o t cru ci al

. [Ci t

. ] ” 2 4 9 Ga. at 2 6 0

(2 ).

7g en eral cred ib il i t y g ro u nd s

, n o t t o s h o w b i as

, p reju d i ce, o r u l t eri o r m ot i v e, an d t h at

co u ns el was n o t i n effect iv e i n fai l i n g t o p ro ffer s u ch i n ad m is s i b l e ev i d en ce. Id

. In s o

co n cl u d in g

, we ci ted Ja cks o n v. S t a te

, 3 16 G a. Ap p

. 5 88

, 5 9 3 -5 9 4 (4 ) (7 3 0 SE2 d 6 9 )

(2 0 1 2), in wh i ch we al s o fo u n d t h at t h e t ri al co u rt co rrect l y ex cl u d ed ev i d en ce o f a

wi t n es s ’ fi rs t o ffen d er p l ea b ecau s e ap p el l an t h ad o n l y at t em p t ed t o im

p each o n

g en eral cred ib il i t y

g ro un d s

. 5

M o reo v er, a t ri al co u rt ’ s d en i a l o f a m o t i on fo r n ew t ri al o n t h e g ro u n d o f

i n effect i v e as si s t an ce, as i n Cr a p p s

, s up ra, “ wi l l b e affi rm ed u n l e s s cl earl y

erro neo u s ,” (ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct u at i on o m i t t ed ), An s l ey v. S t at e

, 3 2 5 Ga. Ap p

. 2 2 6,

2 3 4 (4 ) (7 5 0 SE2 d 4 84 ) (2 0 13 ), an d t h e s am e d eferen t i al st an d ard ap p l ies t o t h e t ri al

co u rt ’ s fact u al fi n d i n g s wi th res p ect t o t he ad m i s s i o n o f ev i d en ce o f fi rs t o ffen d er

p ro b at i o n

. Fo r ex am

p l e, i n H al l v. S t a t e

, 33 5 Ga. Ap p

. 8 9 5

, 8 9 7 (1 ) (7 8 3 SE2 d 4 0 0 )

(2 0 1 6), t h e t ri al co u rt den i ed Hal l ’ s m o ti o n fo r new t ri al aft er t h e St at e was al l o wed

t o cro s s -ex am in e a d efen se wi t n es s fo r b i as by i n t ro d uci n g ev i d en ce of her p en d i n g

5 In Ja cks o n

, t h e wi t n es s h ad s u cces sf u l l y co m pl et ed h i s p ro bat i o n an d h ad

b een d i sch arg ed wi t h o u t an ad j u d i cat i o n o f g ui l t b efo re h e t es ti fi ed

. 3 16 Ga. Ap p

. at

5 9 3 (4 ). Si m i l arl y , i n Red di n g v. S ta t e , 2 9 6 Ga. 4 7 1

, 4 7 4 (3 ) (7 6 9 SE2 d 6 7 ) (2 0 1 5 ),

ci t ed b y t h e St at e, n o ev i d en ce was o ffered t o s h o w th at t h e p ro secu t i o n wi t n es s

act u al l y was o n p ro b at i o n at t h e t i m e o f t ri al , n o r t o s h o w “ an y co n n ect io n b et ween

t h e wi t n es s’ s pu rp o rt ed fi rs t o ffen d er s t at u s an d hi s m o t i v at i o n t o g i v e t es t i m o ny

fav o rab l e t o t h e St at e.” (Ci t at i o n an d p u nct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Id

.

8fi rs t offen d er p ro b at i o n. Th i s wi t n es s ’ t es t i m o n y was n o t fav orab l e t o th e St at e, an d

t h e wi t n es s d i d n o t t es t i fy i n an at t em p t to “ recei v e s p eci al

, fi rs t o ffen der t reat m en t ”

i n h er p en d i ng cas e or to i n g r a t i at e h ers el f wi t h t h e St at e. Id

. at 89 6 (1 ). W e

c o n cl u d ed

, h o w ev er, t h at t he t ri al co u rt act ed wi t h i n i t s di s cret io n i n al l o wi n g t h e

St at e to s h o w t h at th e wi t n es s was b ias ed i n fav o r o f Hal l b ecau s e he “ h ad prev i o u s l y

at t em p t ed t o s h i el d her i n an u n rel at ed cri m i n al m at t er,” ci t i n g fo rm er OCGA §

2 4 -9 -6 8 (“ Th e s t at e o f a wi t n es s ’ s feel i n g s to ward th e p art i es an d h i s rel at i o n s h i p to

t h em m ay al way s b e p ro v ed fo r t h e co ns i d erat i o n o f th e ju ry ”) an d Mel s on

, s u p ra. 3 3 5

Ga. Ap p . at 8 9 6 -8 9 7 (1 ), ci t i n g 2 6 3 Ga. at 6 4 8 (2 ).

Here, t h e earl i er th eft -rel at ed o ffen s es t o wh ich t he m o t h er p l ed g u i l t y were

co m m i t t ed b efo re t h e t i m e o f h er q u arrel wi t h En i ch an d h i s accu s at i o n t h at s h e h ad

m i s ap p ro p ri at ed h i s b en efi t s

. Sh o r t l y t h ereaft er, th e m o th er i n i t i at ed t h e ch arg es

ag ai n s t E n i ch

. M oreo v er, s h e p l ed g u i l t y t o two o f t h e 2 00 9 o ffen s es an d recei v ed

fi rs t o ffen d er p ro b at io n i m m ed i at el y b efo re En ich ’ s t ri al

. Th i s ev i d e n c e p r o v i d es

s o m e s u pp o rt fo r t h e tri al co u rt ’ s co n cl u si o n t h at t h e ex cl u d ed fi rs t offen der s t at u s o f

t h e m ot h er co u l d hav e d em o n s trat ed b i as o n h er p art

. As th e t ri al co u rt ob s erv ed

, t h e

accu s at i o n co u l d h av e b een m o t i v at ed b y a d es i re to p u n i s h En i ch

, o r to “ el i m i n at e

9h i s a b i li t y t o cau s e [t h e wi tn es s ] t ro u b le i n t h e fu t ure” wi t h a ch arg e of t h eft t h a t

co u ld affect th e m o t h er’ s v ery recen t fi rs t o ffen d er pro b at i o n o n t h eft -rel at ed ch arg es

.

No r can we ag ree wi t h t h e St at e t h at ev i d en ce o f E n i c h ’s g u i l t was

o v erwh el m i ng

.

Befo re a fed eral co n s t i t u t i o n al erro r can be h el d h arm l es s

, t h e co u rt m u s t

b e ab l e t o d ecl are a b el i ef th at i t was h arm l es s b ey on d a r e a s o n ab l e

d o u b t

. Th e b u rd en res t s wi t h t h e p ro s ecu ti o n i n m ak i n g th i s s h o wi n g

.

Th e fact t h at th ere w a s o t h e r s u ffi ci en t ev id en ce t o co n vi ct d o es n o t

m ak e t h e erro r harm les s; rat h er, t h e t es t i s wh et her t h e ev i d e n ce m ay

h av e i nfl uen ced t h e ju ry ’ s v erd i ct

.

(C i t a t i o n s an d p u n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed

. ) Ma n g u m v. St a t e

, 2 7 4 G a. 5 7 3

, 5 7 7 (2 ) (5 5 5

SE2 d 4 5 1 ) (2 0 0 1). A p h y s i ci an wh o ex am i n ed th e vi ct i m t es t i fi ed t h a t h e fo u n d n o

p h y s i cal ev i d en ce, an d ack n o wl ed g ed t h at “ t he fi n d in g s d on ’ t t el l u s o n e way o r t h e

o t h er.” Tes t i m o n y was pres en t ed t h at t h e v i ct im recan t e d h er accu sat i o n an d g av e

i n co n s i s t en t s t at em en t s reg ard i n g wh en t h e in ci den t s occu rred

. W h il e En i c h m a d e

ad m i s s i o n s t o po l i ce i n a t h i rd i n t erv iew aft er i n i t i al l y d en y i n g th e al l eg at i o n s

, t h o s e

ad m i s s i o n s were d is p ut ed b ecau s e o f E n i ch ’ s m en t al li m i tat i o n s a n d t he al l eg ed

rep eat ed

, ag g res s i v e q ues t i on i n g b y p o l i ce. To t h e ex t en t t h at th e St at e co n t en d s t h e

erro r w as h arm l es s b ecau s e En i ch was al l o wed t o i n t ro d u ce ev id en ce o f t h e wi t n es s ’

10fi nan ci al d i ffi cu l t i es

, s u ch ev i d en ce i s n o t t h e eq u i val en t of t es t i m o n y t h at a wi t n es s

rep eat ed l y

res o rt ed t o cri m i n al co n d u ct t o al l ev i at e t h o s e d i ffi cu l t i es . Th e St at e h as

t h erefo re fai l ed t o s h o w t hat t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s refu s al t o al l o w an y cro s s ex am i n at i o n

wi t h reg ard t o t h e m o t her’ s fi rs t o ffen d er p ro b at i o n ar y s t a t u s was h arm l es s b ey o n d

a reas on ab l e d o u bt

.

Un d er t h e ap p l i cab l e s t an d ard o f rev i ew, we m u s t t h erefo re affi rm t h e

co n cl u s i o n o f t h e t ri al co u rt t h at a n ew t ri al i s req u i red

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Ba r nes , P. J., a n d

Ri ckma n

, J., co n cu r

.

11