THI RD DI VI SI ON

ELLI NGTON, P. J.

, DI LLA RD and M C FA DDEN, 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

d a ys oft5 the da te of de c is ion to be de em ed tim e l y

file d.

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

M ar ch 29, 2016



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 5 A2 23 6 . ALDAY v . THE STATE.

M C F A D D E N , J u d g e.

Faro n Al day was t ri ed b efo re a j u ry an d co n vi ct ed o f t wo co u n t s o f ch i ld

m o les t at i o n fo r to u ch i ng t h e v ag i n al area an d b u tt o ck s o f m in or ch i l d L

. A

. A l d ay

ap p eal s

, as s ert i n g t h at t h e t ri al ju d g e im p ro p erl y ex p res s ed hi s o p i n i o n as t o wh at h ad

b een p ro v en i n v i o l at i on of OCGA § 1 7

- 8

- 5 7

. B ecau s e we fi n d t h at th e t ri al ju d g e

v i o l at ed OCGA § 1 7-8 -5 7 b y i m p ro p erl y i n t im at i n g h i s o p i ni o n as t o w h at h ad b een

p ro v en i n t h e cas e, we m u s t rev ers e t h e co n v i ct i o n s

. H o we v er, th ere was su ffi ci en t

ev i d en ce t o s u p p o rt t h e co n v ict i o n s an d t h erefo re, des p i te th e tri al erro rs

, Al d ay m ay

b e ret ri ed o n t h e c h a r g e s

. See Gr een v. S t a t e

, 2 9 1 Ga. 2 8 7, 2 88 -2 8 9 (1 ) (7 2 8 SE2 d

6 6 8 ) (2 0 12 ); W

il l ia ms v. S t a t e

, 2 6 8 Ga. 4 8 8

, 4 8 9 (4 9 1 SE2 d 3 7 7 ) (1 9 9 7 ). Al d ay ’ s

fu rt her co n t en t i o n t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n ex cl u d i n g t es t i m o n y co ncern i n g p ri o rfeu d s bet ween hi m an d h i s s o n

, t h e f a t h er o f L. A., p res en t s n o t h i n g fo r rev i ew

b e c a u s e A l d ay d i d n o t p erfect t h e reco rd wi t h a s u ffi ci en t pro ffer of t h e ex p ect e d

t es t i m o ny

.

1

. S u f f ici en cy o f t h e evi d en ce.

“ On ap p eal fro m a cri m i n al co n v i ct i o n

, we v i ew t h e ev i d en ce i n t h e l ig h t m o s t

fav o rab l e to t h e v er d i ct

, wi t h t h e d efen dan t n o l o n ger en jo y i n g a p res u m

p t i o n o f

i n n o cen ce.” Rees e v. S ta t e

, 2 70 Ga. Ap p . 5 2 2, 5 2 3 (6 0 7 SE2 d 1 65 ) (2 0 0 4) (ci t at i o n

o m it t ed ). W e do n o t wei g h t h e ev i d en ce o r ju d g e t h e c r e d i b i l i t y o f wi t n es s es

, b ut

d et erm i n e o n l y wh et h er a rat i on al t ri er o f fact co u ld h av e fo u n d t he es s en t i al el em en t s

o f t h e cri m e b ey o n d a reas o nab l e d ou b t

. Owen s v. S t a t e

, 33 4 G a. Ap p. 20 3 (7 7 8 SE2 d

8 3 0 ) (2 0 1 5 ).

So v iewed

, t he ev i d en ce s h o ws t h at Al d ay i s th e g ran d fat h er of L. A. On J u n e

2 8

, 2 0 1 2

, L. A.’ s fat h er, wh o i s Al d ay ’ s s o n

, en t ered Al d ay ’ s h ou s e an d s aw h i m

s i tt i n g o n t h e co u ch wi t h s i x -y ear-o l d L. A. Th e c h i l d ’s f a t h er t es t i fi ed t h at as h e

en t ered t h e h o u s e, Al d ay ju m p ed u p an d g o t o f

f t h e c o u ch as i f h e h ad d o n e

s o m et h in g b ad

. T h e fat h er t o o k L. A. o u ts id e an d as k ed i f s he an d Al day h ad a s ecret

.

Th e fat h er t es t i fi ed t hat L. A. i m m e d i at el y s t art ed cry i n g an d s ai d t h at s h e d i d n ot

wan t A l d ay to g o to jai l

. Th e fat h er as k ed L. A

. i f Al d ay h ad t o u ch ed h er an d s h e s ai d

2t h at h e h a d

, a l t h o u g h s h e d i d n o t d es cri b e t h e t ou ch in g

. Th e fat her rep o rt ed t h e

i n ci d en t t o h is wi fe, L. A.’ s m o t h er, wh o was at wo rk

. Th e fo l l o wi n g d ay

, t h e m o t h er

o f L

. A. as k ed h er i f an y on e h ad t o uch ed h er “ n o -n o ” s p o t s, an d L. A. s ai d t h at Al d ay

h ad do n e s o o n h er cl o t h es

. A week l at er, a fo ren s i c i n terv i ew o f L. A

. was co n d u ct ed

.

L. A. i ni t i al l y t ol d t h e fo ren s i c i n terv i ewer t h at s he h ad n o t b een t o u ch ed o n h er

p ri v at e part s

, b u t s u b s eq u en tl y s ai d t hat Al day h ad u s ed hi s h an d t o m as s ag e h er

v ag in al area an d t o u ch h er b u t t ock s

. At t ri al

, L

. A. t es t i fi ed t h at Al d ay h ad m as s ag ed

h er o n “ t h e g irl ’ s p art ,” b u t n ot o n h er “ b oo t y .”

Bas ed o n t h e fo reg o i n g ev i d en ce, we “ co n c l u d e t h at t h ere was su ffi ci en t

ev i d en ce fro m wh i ch th e ju r y w a s au th o ri zed t o fi n d [Al d ay ] g u il t y b ey o n d a

reas on ab l e d o u b t of [t h e two co u n t s ] o f ch il d m o les t at i o n .” Ha rr i s v. S t at e

, 3 3 3 Ga.

Ap p

. 1 1 8

, 1 1 9 (1 ) (a) (7 7 5 SE2 d 6 0 2 ) (2 0 1 5 ) ( ci t at i o ns o m i t t ed ). An y “ is s u es o f

c o ns i st en cy an d cred i b i l i t y were fo r th e ju ry to d eci d e.” Ja cks on v. S t a t e

, 3 3 4 Ga.

Ap p . 4 6 9 , 4 7 3 (2 ) (7 7 9 SE2 d 7 0 0 ) (2 0 1 5 ) (ci t at i o ns o m i t t ed ).

2

. Vi o l a t i o n s o

f OCGA §

1 7 -8 -5 7

.

Al d ay as s ert s t h at t h e t ri al ju d g e v i o lat ed OCGA § 17 -8 -5 7 b y m ak i n g s ev eral

i m p ro p er co m

m en t s t h at ex p res s ed hi s o p i ni o n ab o ut wh at h ad been p r o v e d i n t h e

cas e. W e ag ree.

3Th e v ers i on o f O CGA § 1 7 -8 -5 7 t h at was i n effect at t h e ti m e of Al d ay ’ s

No v em b er 2 0 13 t ri al p ro v i d ed :

It i s erro r fo r an y ju d g e i n an y cri m i n al cas e, d uri n g i t s p ro g res s or i n h i s

ch a r g e t o t he ju ry

, t o ex p res s o r i n t im at e hi s o p i n i on as t o wh at h as o r

h as n o t b een p ro v ed o r as t o t h e g u i l t of th e accu s ed

. Sh o ul d an y j u d ge

v i o l at e t h is [c] o de s ect i o n

, t h e v i o l at i o n s h al l b e h el d b y t h e Su p rem e

Co u rt o r Co u rt o f Ap p eal s t o b e erro r a n d t h e deci s i o n i n t he cas e

rev ers ed

, an d a n ew t ri al gran t ed i n t h e co u rt b el o w w i t h s u ch d i rect i o n s

as t h e Su p rem e Co u rt o r Co u rt o f Ap p eal s m ay l awfu l l y g i v e. 1

Co m m en t s b y t h e t ri al ju d g e “ t hat i n cl u d e ex p res s i o n s o f o p i n io n as t o wh at h as b een

p ro v en

, t he cred i b i li t y o f a wi t n es s

, o r o n a d i s pu t ed i s su e o f m at eri al fact are cl earl y

i m p ro p er u n der OCGA § 1 7-8 -5 7 . [Ci t s .] ” H u f f v. S t a t e

, 3 34 Ga. Ap p

. 2 5 4, 2 5 7 (1 )

(7 7 9 SE2 d 2 9) (2 0 1 5 ) (ap p l y i n g s am e v ers i o n o f s t at u t e t h at was i n effect d u ri n g t h e

t ri al i n t hi s cas e).

a. Co mmen t o u t

si d e j u r y’s p r es en ce.

Aft er an o bject i o n d u ri n g Al d ay ’ s cro ss- e xa m ina tion of the s t at e’ s fi rs t wi t n es s

,

L. A.’ s fat h er, th e t ri al co u rt ex cu s ed t h e ju ry an d co n ferred wi t h t h e at t o rn ey s o u t s i d e

t h e ju ry ’ s p res en ce. D u ri n g t h e co nferen ce, d efen s e co u n s el ex pl ai ned t h at h e wan t ed

1 Th e cu rren t vers i o n o f t h i s co d e s ect i o n b ecam e effect i v e J u l y 1

, 2 0 1 5

, a n d

s i m i l arl y p ro vi d es t h at “ [i ] t i s erro r fo r an y ju d g e, d u ri n g an y

p h as e o f an y

cri m i n al

cas e, t o ex p res s or i n t im at e t o t he ju ry t h e j u d ge’ s op i n i o n as t o wh et h er a fact at i s s u e

h as o r has n o t b een p ro v ed o r as t o t h e g u i l t o f t h e accu s ed .” OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 7 (a) (1 ).

4t o as k t h e fat her ab o u t h o w h e h ad t h reat en ed an d b een ag gres s i v e t o ward Al d ay

. Th e

ju d g e refu s ed t o al l ow s u ch q u es t i o n in g

, s t at i n g , “ Yo u k n o w, [co u n s el o r] , I b el i ev e

i f m y fat h er m o les t ed m

y d au g h t er I b el i ev e I m i g h t b e ag gres s i v e t o o .”

Ev en o u t s i d e t h e ju ry ’ s p res en ce, a ju dg e “ m us t b e al ert t o av o i d [co m m en t s ]

t h at m ay b e p ercei ved as p reju d i ci al

. ” Ph i l l i p s v. S t a t e

, 2 7 5 Ga. 5 9 5

, 5 9 9 (5 7 1 S.E.2 d

3 6 1 (2 00 2 ) (ci tat i o n s an d p u n ct u at i o n om i t t ed ) (co m m en ts aft er i m

p o s i n g s en t en ce).

Nev ert h el es s

, b ecau s e th e ju d g e’ s co m m en t w as m ad e o u t s i d e t h e ju ry ’ s p res en ce, i t

d o es n o t co n s ti t ut e a v i o l at i on o f OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 7

. “ Th a t [ c] od e s ect i o n ’ s s co p e

. . . i s co n fi n ed t o m at t ers occu rri n g b efo re t h e ju ry

. [Ci t.] ” In gr a m v. S t a t e

, 2 8 6 Ga.

Ap p

. 6 6 2

, 6 63 (2 ) (6 5 0 SE2 d 7 4 3 ) (2 00 7 ). “ Hen ce, s t an d i n g al o ne, [t h e ju d g e’ s

co m m e n t d o es ] n o t m an d at e t h at ap p el l an t ’ s co n v i ct i on s b e rev ers ed .” Jo h n s o n v.

S t a t e , 2 7 8 Ga. 3 44 , 3 4 6 (2 ) (6 0 2 SE2 d 6 2 3 ) (2 0 0 4 ).

b

. Co mmen ts d

u r i n g cr o s s -exa mi na t i o n o

f f o r en s i c i n t er vi ewer

.

Th ere was no ph y si cal ev i d en ce in t he in s t an t cas e. Th e s t at e’ s cas e res t e d

al m o s t en t i rel y o n t h e s t at em en t s o f L. A., i n cl u d i n g t h e fo ren s i c i n t erv i ew o f L. A.,

wh i ch was i n t ro d u ced d u ri n g t h e t es t i m o n y o f t he fo ren s i c i n t erv i ewer. Th e d efen s e,

t h ro u g h cro s s -ex am i n at i on o f t he fo ren s i c i n t erv i ewer an d p res en t at i o n o f t es t i m o ny

fro m i t s o wn fo ren s i c ex pert

, s o u g h t t o s h o w t h at th e fo ren s i c in t erv i ew o f L. A. was

5u n rel i ab l e b ecau s e of b i as es an d fl aws i n t he in t erv i ew. Du ri n g d efen se c o u n sel ’ s

cro s s -ex am i n at i o n o f t h e fo ren si c i nte r vie w e r

, the tr ia l j udge i n t erject ed q u es t i o n s an d

co m m en t s

.

(i ) Th e ev i den ce s h o wed t h at d ur i n g t h e fo ren s i c i n terv i ew, L. A. i n i t i al l y

i n d i cat ed

, i n fo u r s ep arat e res p o n s es t o t h e i n t erv i ewer’ s q u es t i o n s

, t h at s he h ad n ot

b een t o u ch ed o n h er p ri v at e p art

. Bu t sh e su b seq u en tl y s t at ed t hat A l d ay h ad

m as s ag ed h er p ri v at e area. At t ri al

, d u ri n g d i rect ex a m i n at i o n b y t h e s t at e, t h e

fo ren s i c in t erv i ewer o p in ed th at t h e ap p aren t i n c o n s i s t en cy in L. A.’ s st at em en t s

co u ld h av e b een du e t o her n o t u s i n g t h e w o rd “ t o u ch ” an d i n s t ead u si n g t h e wo rd

“ m as s ag e” t o refer t o an y t ou ch i n g o f her v ag i n a l a r e a

. Th e i n terv i ewer fu rt h er

t es t i fi ed t h at Al d ay m i g h t h av e u s ed t h at t erm i n ol o g y as p ar t o f h i s “ g ro o m i n g

p ro ces s ” o f t h e ch i l d

.

On cro s s -ex am i n at i o n, d e f en s e co un s el as k ed t h e fo ren si c in t erv i ewer i f h er

g o al was t o co nfi rm t h e s t at e’ s al l eg at i o ns o f ab u s e, no t i n g t h at du ri n g t he fo ren s i c

i n t erv i ew s h e h ad co n s u l t ed wi t h a l aw en fo rcem en t i n v es t i g at o r wh o t o l d h er t o as k

cert ai n q ues t i o n s o f t h e ch i ld

. Aft er t h e fo ren s i c i n t erv iewer d en i ed t h at co n fi rm i n g

t h e al l eg at i o n s o f ab u s e was her g o al

, d efen s e co u n s el s o u g ht t o ch al l e n g e t h at

res p o n s e b y p o i n t i n g o u t t hat s h e h ad co n ti nu ed q u es t i o n i n g L. A

. ev en aft er s h e h ad

6s ai d “ no ” fo u r t i m es wh en as k ed ab o u t bei n g t o u ch e d

. Wh en co un s el b eg an as k i n g

t h e w i t nes s ab o u t t h o s e i n i t i al den i al s

, t h e s t at e o b ject ed as t o t h e l ack o f a q u es t i o n,

a n d t h e t ri al ju d g e res p o n d ed : “ W el l

, I t h i n k h e’ s read i n g t o ward a q ues t i o n

. Bu t I

t h i n k t h at was t h e d i s t in ct i o n t h ey m ad e b et ween t ou ch i ng an d a m as sag e, b u t k eep

g o i n g , [d efen s e co un sel ] .”

Th e ju dg e’ s co m

m en t referen ced t h e fo ren s i c i nt erv i ewer ’s earl i er t es t i m o ny

t h at t he i n co n s i s ten cy b et w een L. A.’ s i n i ti al res p o n s es t h at s h e h ad n o t b een

“ t o uch ed ” an d h er s u b s eq u en t res p o n s es t h at s h e h ad b een “ m as s ag ed ” co u l d b e

ex p lai n ed by t he t erm i n o l o gy u s ed b y t h e ch i l d : t he fo ren s i c i nt erv i ewer h ad o p i n ed

t h at Al d ay m i g h t h av e i n t ro d uced t he t erm “ m as s ag e” in t h e co u rs e o f “ g ro o m i n g ” L.

A., t h at i s o f t each i n g h er t o t o l erat e m o l es t at i o n . Pri o r to t h e j u d ge’ s co m m en t

, t h e

t o u ch / m as s ag e d i s t in ct i o n h ad n o t co m e u p i n d e f en se co u n sel ’ s q ues t i o n s o r t h e

fo ren s i c i n t erv iewer’ s res p on s es

.

“ Th e p u rp o s e o f OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 7

, at l eas t i n part

, i s t o p rev en t t h e ju ry fro m

b ei n g i n fl u en ced b y an y di s cl o s u re o f th e t ri al co u rt ’ s o p i n i on reg ard i n g t h e

cred i b i l i t y o f a wi t n es s

. Th e d et erm i n at io n o f t h e cred i b il i t y o f a wi tn es s i s s o u n d l y

wi t h i n th e p ro vi nce o f t h e ju ry an d i s a m at eri al fact i n ev ery cas e.” Mu rp h y v. S t a t e

,

2 9 0 Ga. 4 5 9

, 4 6 0 (2 ) (7 2 2 SE2 d 5 1 ) (2 0 1 2 ) (ci t at io n s o m i t t ed ). Here, t h e ju ry co u ld

7h av e i n terp ret ed t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s co m m en t as ex p res s i ng h is fav orab l e o p in i o n o f t h e

cred i b i l i t y an d rel i ab i l it y o f t he fo ren s i c i n t erv i ewer’ s ex p l an at io n o f th e d i st i n ct i o n

b et ween t h e “ t o u ch ” an d “ m as s ag e.” “ Th erefo re, t h e t r i a l c o u rt erred i n m ak i n g

s t at em en t s t hat co u l d hav e b e e n i n t erp ret ed as offeri n g an o p i ni o n o n [t h e fo ren s i c

i n t erv i ewer’ s ] cred i b i l it y .” Id . at 4 6 1 (2 ).

(i i) Al d ay ’ s at t o rn ey

al s o as k ed th e fo ren s i c i n terv i ewer i f a s tat em en t b y t h e

ch i l d th at s h e h ad b een to uch ed was d i fferen t fro m a st at em en t b y t h e ch i ld t h at s h e

h ad t o ld so m eo n e t h at s h e h ad b een t o uch ed . Th e co u rt i n terv en ed , i n t erru p t i n g t h e

d efen s e’ s cro s s -ex am i n at i o n t o p o s e t h e fo l lo wi n g q u es t io n t o t h e wi t n es s : “ Are we

d eal i ng h ere wi t h a m at t er o f s em an t i cs wi t h

. . . a l i t t l e ch i l d[? ] I m ean

, i t wo u l d b e

l i ke t ak i n g o n e pag e o u t of a h u n d red p ag e b o o k an d i s ol at i n g i t

. Yo u ’ v e g o t t o g et

t h e wh o l e t h i n g t og et h er bas ical l y ; i s th at wh at y o u ’ re t ryi n g t o d o ? ” T h e fo ren s i c

i n t erv i ewer res p o nd ed t h at th e d i s t i n ct i o n rai s ed b y th e d efen s e q u es t i o n w as i n d eed

“ a m at t er o f s em an t i cs .”

It i s arg u ab l e wh et h er d efen s e co u n s el ’ s q ues t i o n w a s a b o u t a m at t er o f

s em an ti cs o r ab o u t a s ub s tan t i v e d i s t i n ct i o n

– bet ween a ch i l d s ay i n g s h e h ad b een

t o u ch ed an d s ay i n g s h e h ad to l d s o m eo n e s h e h ad b een t o uch ed

. Th e ch aract eri zat i o n

o f d efen s e co u n s el ’ s qu es t i o n a s m erel y a “ m at t er of sem an t i cs ” co u ld hav e b een

8c o ns t ru ed b y a ju ro r as an i n t i m at i o n o f t h e ju d g e’ s o p i n i o n t h at t h e d e f e n s e w a s

at t em p t i n g t o d raw a m ean i n g l es s d i s t i n ct i o n

. “ Th e reas o n fo r OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 7

p ro h ib i t i ng t h e ju dg e fro m i n t i m at i n g h i s op i n i o n as to w h at h as been p ro ved i s to

k e e p t h e ju ry fro m b ei ng i n fl u en ced .” Ch u ml ey v. S ta t e

, 2 8 2 Ga. 8 5 5, 8 57 (2 ) (6 5 5

SE2 d 8 1 3) (2 0 0 8) (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 e n o t e t h at t h e l ack o f an y o b ject i o ns t o t h e t ri al co urt ’ s co m m en t s i s o f n o

co n seq u en ce b ecau s e u n d er th e v ers i o n o f t h e st at ut e t h en i n e f f e ct

, a “ v i o l at i o n o f

OCGA § 1 7-8 -5 7 was al way s ‘ p l ai n erro r’ an d fai l u re t o o b ject [wo u ld ] n o t p recl u d e

ap p el l at e rev i ew. Gi v en th e m an d at o ry nat u re o f t h at v ers i o n o f OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 7 an d

t h e cas e l aw i n t erp ret i n g i t

, w e m u s t rev ers e [Al d ay ’ s ] co n v i ct i o n [s ] an d rem an d t h e

c a s e t o t h e t ri al co u rt fo r a n ew t ri al .” Mu rp h y

, s u p ra at 46 1 (2 ) (ci tat i o n s o m i t t ed ).

3

. Evi d en ce o f p r io r f eu d s b et ween wi t nes s a n d d

ef en d a n t

.

Al d ay co n t en d s t h at t h e tri al co u rt erred i n ex cl ud i n g t es t i m o ny o f p ri o r feu d s

,

ap p are n tl y co n cern i n g fi n an ci al d eal i n g s, bet ween h i m an d h i s so n

, L. A.’ s fat h er.

Al d ay co rrect l y n o t es th at “ [t ] h e s t at e o f a wi t nes s ’ s feel i ng s t o ward t h e p art i es an d

h i s rel at i on s hi p t o t hem m ay al way s b e p ro v ed fo r t h e co n s i d erat i o n o f th e ju ry

, an d

a d e f e n d an t h as t h e ri g h t t o m ak e a t ho ro u gh an d s i ft i n g cro s s -ex am i nat i o n o f t h e

9wi t n es s es ag ai n s t h i m .” Mi cel i v. S t a t e

, 3 0 8 Ga. Ap p

. 2 2 5, 2 2 7 (2 ) (7 0 7 S E 2 d 1 4 1 )

(2 0 1 1) (ci t at i o n s an d p u nct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

Ho wev er, b ecau se [Al d ay ] d i d n o t p erfect t h e reco rd w i t h a su ffi ci en t

p ro ffer o f t h e [ex p ect ed ] t es t i m o n y

, w e are u n ab l e t o reach t he m eri t s o f

h i s cl ai m

. Wh e r e t h e erro r al l eg ed i s t hat cert ai n ev id en ce h as b een

wro n g fu l l y

ex cl u d ed

, t h e ru l e i s wel l s et t l ed t h at t h ere m u s t h av e b een

a p ro ffer o r o ffer o f a d efi n it e s ort s o t h at b o th t he t ri al co u rt an d th e

ap p el l at e co urt can k no w wh et h er t h e ev i d en ce real l y ex i s ts

. I n th e

ab s en ce o f su ch a p ro ffer, t h e as s i g n m en t o f erro r i s s o i n co m p l et e as t o

p recl u d e i t s co n s i d erat i o n b y t h i s (c)o u rt

.

Mi cel i v. S t a t e

, 3 0 8 Ga. Ap p

. 2 2 5

, 2 2 8 (2 ) (7 0 7 SE2 d 1 4 1 ) (2 0 1 1 ) (ci t at i o n s a n d

p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed ).

4

. Rema in i n g

cl a i ms o f er r o r

.

Hav i n g rev ers ed t h e ju d g m en t s o f co n vi ct i o n an d d et erm in ed t h at Al d ay i s

en t i t l ed t o a n ew t ri al

, we n eed n o t ad dres s h i s ad d i t i o n al cl ai m s o f erro r as t h ey are

m o ot o r u n l i k el y

t o recu r o n ret ri al

. W

i l l i n g h a m v. St a t e

, 2 7 9 G a. 8 8 6, 8 8 9 (3 ) (6 2 2

SE2 d 3 4 3) (3 ) (2 0 0 5 ).

Ju d g men t rever

s ed

. E l l i n g t o n

, P. J., a n d Di l l a r d

, J., co n cu r in t h e j u d

g men t

o n l y.

10