THI RD DI VI SI ON

M C FA DDEN, C. J.

, D OYLE, P. J.

, and HODGES, 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.

https ://w w w

. ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s

D E A D LIN E S A R E N O LO N G E R TO LLE D IN T

H I S

C O U R T. A LL FILIN G S M U ST B E S U B M I TTE D WITH IN

TH E TIM E S S E T B Y

O U R C O U R T R U LE S

.

Septem b er 1, 2020



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A2 0 A1 35 6 . BROW

N v . STATE.

A2 0 A1 35 8 . W H ITESELL v . STATE.

H O D G E S , J u d g e.

F o l l o wi ng a jo i n t t ri al

, Darro w Bro wn an d Lau ra W h i t es el l were b o th

co n vi ct ed b y a j u r y o f fi v e co u n t s o f cru el t y t o ch i l d ren res u lt in g fro m t h e

m a l n o u ri s h ed s t at e o f t ho s e ch i l d ren , as wel l as t h e p h y s ical ab u s e o f o n e o f t h e

ch i l d ren

. Th e tri al co u rt d en i ed each o f t h ei r m o t i o n s fo r n ew t r i a l

, an d Bro wn an d

W h i t es el l n o w ap p eal

. W e h av e co n s o li d a t e d t h e a p p eal s fo r p u rp o s es o f i s s u i n g a

d eci s i o n

. W h i t es el l co n t en d s t h at t he ev i d en ce ag ai n s t h er was i ns u ffi ci en t t o s u s t ai n

t h e v erd i ct

. Sh e a l s o c o nt en d s t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y (1 ) fai l i n g to qu es t i o n a

ju ro r b e f o re rel eas i n g h er fro m t h e p an el ; (2 ) fai l i n g t o d efi n e t h e t erm “ wi l l fu l l y

d ep ri v es ” i n t h e ju ry ch arg es wh en d efi n i n g t h e cri m e o f ch i ld cru el t y ; an d (3 )ap p ly i n g t h e w ro n g s t an d ard fo r i n effect i ve as s i s t an ce o f co un s el

. Las t l y , s h e

co n ten d s t h at h er t ri al co u n sel w as i n effect iv e fo r fai l i n g t o (1 ) cal l s o m e o f t h e ch i ld

v i ct i m s as wi t n es s es ; (2 ) as k t h e t r i a l co u rt t o q u es t i o n t h e ju ro r rel eas ed fro m t h e

p an el ; an d (3 ) req u es t a ch arg e o n reck les s co n du ct as a l es s er i ncl u d ed o ffen s e. On

ap p eal

, Bro wn co n t en d s t hat (1 ) t h e tri al co u rt erred i n refu si n g t o ad m it ev i d en ce o f

h i s m ed i cal co nd i t i o n to ex p l ai n h i s wei g h t l o s s ; (2 ) th e t ri al co u rt erred i n fai l i n g to

q u es ti o n a ju ro r b efo re rem o v in g h er fro m t h e p an el ; an d ( 3 ) h i s t ri al co u n s el was

i n e f f ect i v e fo r fai l i n g to req u es t a ch arg e o n reck l es s co n d uct as a l es s er in cl u d ed

o ffen s e. Fo r t h e fo l l o wi ng reas o n s , we affi rm i n b o t h cas es

.

“ On ap p eal fro m a cri m i n al co n v i ct io n , a d efen dan t n o l o n g er en jo y s t h e

p res u m p t i o n o f i n n o cen ce, an d t h e ev i d en ce i s v i ewed i n t he li g h t m o s t fav o rab l e to

t h e g u i l t y v erd ict .” (Ci tat i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed

. ) W a l ker v. S t a t e , 3 4 9 Ga. Ap p.

1 8 8 (8 25 SE2 d 5 7 8 ) (2 0 1 9 ).

So v iewed

, t he ev id en ce s h o ws t h at

, i n 2 0 1 5

, W h it es el l was t h e m o t h er o f s ix

ch i l d r e n , i n c l u d i n g J

. W

., ag e 1 3 ; N. M

., ag e 9 ; T. M

., ag e 7; an d M

. B., ag e 6

. 1 In

M ay 2 0 1 5, em erg en cy

res p o nd ers recei v ed a cal l t o rep o rt an u n res po n si v e ch i l d at

1 W h i t es el l an d Bro wn h av e two y o u n g er ch i l dren t o g et h er, b ut th e St at e fi l ed

n o ch arg es ag ai n s t t h e ap pel l an t s as a res u l t of t h e co n d i t i o n of t h o s e t w o ch i l d r e n , wh o were t h ree y ears o l d an d n i n e m o n t hs o l d i n 2 0 15

.

2an ex t en d ed -s t ay m o tel

. Th ey fo u n d J

. W

. u n co n s ci o u s i n t h e b at h t u b in ju st a t -s hi rt

an d u nd erwear. Sh e was v ery frai l

, wi t h t wo bl ack ey es t h at were s wo l len s h u t

. Th e

ch i l d in i t i al l y h ad n o p u l s e, an d h ad very s h al l o w b reat h in g wh i ch n eed ed as s i s t an ce.

Her b l o o d s u g ar l ev el was al s o v ery l o w. Aft er fi rs t r e s p o n d e r s r ev i v ed h er i n t h e

am bu l an ce, J

. W

. rep o rt ed t h at h er ey es were b l ack b ecau s e b ot h W h i t es el l an d

Bro w n h it h er.

J

. W

. arri v ed at t h e h o s p i t al i n cri t i cal co n d i t io n an d, aft er t reat m en t i n t h e

em erg en cy ro o m , w as ad m i t ted t o th e p ed i at ri c i n t en s i v e care u n i t

. J

. W

. rep o rt ed to

d o ct o rs t h at W h i t es el l an d Bro w n g av e her t h e b lack ey es , an d t hat sh e h ad t ro u b l e

g et t i n g fo o d at h o m e an d h ad no t eat en in t wo week s

. D oct o rs d et erm i n ed t h at t h e

t rau m a t o h er ey es w as co ns i st en t wi t h h av i n g b een p u n ch ed

, an d wo u l d b e u n l i k el y

t o o ccu r as a r e s u l t o f a fal l

. In ad d i t i o n t o t h e b l ack ey es , J

. W

. h ad “ s cat t ered o ld

m ark s , h eal ed m ark s ” o n h er b o d y

.

J

. W

. was ex t rem el y th i n wh en ad m i t ted t o th e h o s p i t al

. Sh e wei g h ed o n l y 5 5

p o u n d s , wh i ch i s b el ow t h e t h i rd p ercen t il e fo r wei g h t fo r a g i rl h er ag e an d h ei g h t

.

By co m p ari s o n , th e 5 0 t h p ercen t i l e wei g h t fo r a 1 3-y ear-o l d g i rl o f J

. W .’ s h ei g h t i s

1 1 0 p o u n d s. Fu rt h erm o re, J

. W .’ s b od y was react i n g t o n o t h av i n g en o u g h fo o d fo r

a p ro l o n g ed p eri o d o f t i m e. J . W . h ad a co n di t i o n cal l ed “ s h o ck b o wel ” as wel l as a

3s m al l l i ver, wh i ch was n ot p ro p erl y fu n ct i on i ng , d ue t o d eh y d rat io n an d m al n u t ri t i o n.

Sh e al s o h ad en cep h al o m al aci a, o r was ti n g o f t h e b rai n

. In ad d i t i o n , J

. W

. h ad d ark

m ark s o n h er jo i n t s , i n d i cat i n g t h at t h ere h ad b een ch ro n i c p res s u re o n t h e jo i n t d u e

t o t h e r e bei n g n o fat o v er t he bo n e. Bas ed on J

. W .’ s d em ean o r an d m ed i cal t es t s ,

d o ct o rs di d n o t s u s p ect an eat i ng d is o rd er, b u t t h ey d i d h av e co n cern s t h at J. W

. was

a v i ct i m o f ch i l d ab u se.

As a res ul t o f J. W .’ s co n d i t i o n, au t h o ri t i es i n v es t ig at ed t h e co n d i t i o n o f

W h i t e s e l l ’ s ot h er ch i l d ren

. Th ree o f W h it es el l’ s o t h er ch i l d ren , N. M

. , T. M

., an d

M

. B., were al s o u n d erwei g h t. Ni n e-y ear-o l d N. M .’ s wei g ht was th at o f an av erag e

fi ve-y ear-o l d ; s ev en -y ear-o l d T. M .’ s wei g ht was t h at o f an av erag e t h ree-y ear-o l d;

an d si x -y ear-o l d M

. B.’ s wei g h t was t h at o f an av erag e t h ree-an d -a-h al f-y ear-o l d

. In

co m p ari s o n t o t h e frai l st at e o f t h e ch i l d ren , W hi t es el l an d Bro wn w ere b o t h a h eal t hy

wei g h t : W h i t es el l , wh o was aro u n d 5 feet 3 i nch es t al l

, wei g h ed 1 1 5 p o u n d s , wh i l e

Bro w n was 5 feet 9 i n ch es t al l an d wei g hed 1 8 5 p ou n ds

.

W h en i n t erv i ewed b y p o l i ce, Bro wn ad m i t ted th at h e h i d fo o d i n t h e fam i l y v an

t o k eep i t away fro m J. W

. an d t h at J

. W

. wo u l d go t h ro u g h th e g arb ag e t o t ry t o fi n d

fo o d

. Th e Dep art m en t of Fam i l y an d Ch i l d ren Serv ices (“ DFACS”) al s o in v es t i g at ed

t h e cas e an d s ub st an t i at ed t he al l eg at i o n s o f ab u s e. J

. W

. cl ai m ed t h at W hi tes el l an d

4Bro w n t o o k d ru g s an d d ran k al co h o l

, an d Bro wn ad m i t t ed t h at h e s m o k ed m ari ju an a

o n e t o t wo t i m es p er week

. J

. W

. t o l d DFACS t h at s h e was b eat en w i t h a b el t

, s h oe,

p i p e, h an d

, an d fi s t

, an d t h at s h e was d ep ri v ed o f fo o d as a fo rm o f p u n i s h m en t

. J

. W

.

was al s o req ui red to s l eep i n t h e b at h t ub as p u n is h m en t fo r st eal i ng fo o d i n t he h o m e.

Al t h o u g h W h i t es el l p rev io us l y recei v ed fo o d st am p s , s h e d id no t sh o w u p at h er

s ch ed u l ed in t erv i ews t o co nt i n u e recei v i n g t h em an d

, as a res u lt

, her b en ef i t s w e r e

d i s co n t i n u ed

. W h en Wh i tes el l l i v ed i n Pen ns y l v an ia an d n eed ed as s i s t an ce, s h e

co n tact ed t h at s t at e’ s ch i l d p ro t ect i o n ag en cy , b u t s h e d i d no t reach o u t t o DFACS in

Geo rg i a. No ne o f t h e s ch o ol -ag ed ch i l dren wen t t o s ch o o l wh il e i n Geo rg i a. Fo ren s i c

s p eci al i s t s i n t erv i ewed J

. W

. an d M

. B. an d fo u n d t h at t h ei r s t at em en t s were

co n si s t en t wi t h ch i l d ren wh o h ad wi t n es sed o r ex p eri en ced p h y s i cal ab u se.

W h i t es el l an d Bro wn were ch arg ed wi th fi v e co u n t s o f c r u e l t y t o ch i l d ren in

t h e fi rs t d eg ree. Fo u r o f t h e ch arg es w ere fo r wi l l fu l ly d ep r i v i n g t h e ch i l d ren o f

n eces s ary s u s t en an ce t o t h e ex t en t t h at t h e ch i l d ren ’ s h eal t h an d w el l

- b e i n g was

jeo p ard i zed

. Th e rem ai n i n g ch arg e was fo r “ cru el an d ex ces s i v e p h y s i cal an d m en t al

p ai n b y s t ri k i n g [J

. W .] wi th a p i p e an d / o r fi s t s .” Fo l l o w i n g a ju ry t ri al

, W hi t es el l an d

Bro w n were co n v i ct ed o f al l ch arg es

. T he t ri al co urt d en i ed b o t h ap p el l an t s ’

res p ect i ve m o t i o n s fo r n ew t ri al , an d t h i s ap p eal fo l l o wed

.

5Ca s e No . A2 0 A1 3 5 8

1

. W h i tes el l co n t en d s th at t h e ev id en ce ag ai n s t h er was i n s uffi ci en t t o s u s t ai n

t h e v erd i ct

. 2 W e d i s ag ree.

In o u r rev i ew o f t hi s en u m erat i on ,

[w] e s t a r t wi t h t he leg al s t an dard fo r as s es s i n g th e leg al s u ffi ci en cy o f

ev i d en ce t o s u p p o rt a co n v i ct i o n. Ev i d en ce m ay b e l es s t h a n

o v erwh el m in g , b u t s t i l l s u ffi ci en t t o s u s t ai n a co n v ict i o n

. An d wh en we

co n s i d er t h e ev i den c e ’s l eg al s uffi ci en cy , we m u st pu t as id e an y

q u es t i o n s ab ou t co n fl ict i n g ev i d en ce, t h e cred i b i l i t y o f wi t n es s es , o r th e

wei g h t of t h e ev i d en c e , l eav i n g th e res o l u t i o n o f s u ch t h i n g s t o th e

d i s cret i o n o f th e t ri er o f fact

. In s t ead

, w e m u s t v i ew t h e ev id en ce i n th e

l i gh t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t he v erd ict

. W e i n q u i re on l y wh et h er an y rat i o nal

t ri er o f fact m i g h t fi n d b ey o n d a reas o n ab le d ou b t fro m t h at ev i d en ce

t h at t h e d efen dan t i s g ui l t y o f t h e cri m es o f wh i ch s h e was co n v ict ed

.

(Ci t at i o n s an d p u n c t u at io n o m it t ed .) El l er v. St a t e , 3 0 3 Ga. 3 7 3

, 3 7 7-3 7 8 (II) (8 1 1

S E 2 d 2 9 9 ) (2 01 8 ). M oreo v er, we ack no wl ed g e t h at “ [t ] h e t es t i m on y o f a s i n g l e

wi t n es s i s g en eral l y s uffi ci en t t o es tab l i s h a fact .” OCGA § 2 4 -1 4 -8

. Rel ev an t t o t h i s

cas e,

2 “ Fo r co n v en i en ce of di s cu s s i o n , we h av e t ak en th e en u m erat ed erro rs o u t o f

t h e o rd er i n wh i ch ap p el l an t h as l i s t ed t h em

. . . ” Fo s ter v. M o r r i s o n , 1 7 7 Ga. Ap p. 2 5 0 (1 ) (3 3 9 SE2 d 3 07 ) (1 9 8 5 ).

6[a] p aren t

, g u ard i an , o r o th er p ers o n s u p erv i s i n g t h e w el fare o f o r h av i n g

i m m ed i at e ch arg e o r cu s t o d y o f a ch i l d u nd er t h e ag e of 18 co m m i ts th e

o ffen s e o f cru el t y t o ch i l d ren i n t h e fi rs t d eg ree wh en s u ch p ers o n

wi l l fu l l y d ep ri v es t h e ch i l d o f n eces s ary s u st en an ce t o t h e ex t en t t h at th e

ch i l d ’ s h eal t h o r wel l -b ei n g i s j eo p ard i zed [an d ] [a] n y p ers o n co m

m i t s

t h e o ffen s e o f cru el t y t o ch i l d r en i n t h e fi rs t d eg ree wh en s u ch p ers o n

m al i ci o u s l y cau s es a ch i l d u n d er t h e ag e o f 18 cru el o r ex ces s iv e

p h y s i cal o r m en t al pai n

.

OCGA § 1 6 -5 -7 0 (a) - (b ).

Here, t h e ev i den ce s h o ws t h at J

. W

. was fo u n d u n co n s ci o u s , wi t h t wo b l ack

ey es , no p u l s e, l o w b l o od s u g ar, an d s o frai l th at s h e ap peared s k el et al

. Her co n d i t i o n

was cri t i cal an d s h e n eed ed t o b e t reat ed at t h e p ed i at ri c i n ten s i v e care u n i t t o s u rv i ve.

Sh e rep o rt ed n o t h a v i n g eat en i n t wo week s an d t hat sh e w as d ep ri v ed o f fo o d as a

fo rm o f p u n i s h m en t fo r s t eal i n g fo od i n h er o wn h o m e. Her wei gh t was hal f o f wh at

an av erag e ch i l d h er ag e an d h ei g h t s h ou l d w ei g h

. Do ct ors o p i n ed th at

, g i v en J

. W .’ s

co n di t i o n , her b o d y h ad g o n e t h ro u g h a p ro lo n ged p eri o d w i t ho u t ad eq u at e fo o d

. Sh e

rep o rt ed th at h er b l ack ey es were t h e res u lt o f b ei n g h i t b y b o th W h i tes el l an d Bro wn ,

an d her d o ct o r t es t i fi ed t h at t h i s i n ju ry wo u l d u nl i k el y o ccu r as a res ul t o f a fal l

. Th e

ev i d en ce al s o d em o n s t rat ed t h at t h r e e o f J

. W .’ s s i b l i ng s were al s o co n s i d erab l y

u n d erwei g ht

, t o t he p o i n t t h at t hei r wei gh t was co n s i s t en t wi t h t h at o f m u ch y o u n g er

7ch i l d ren

. In co n tras t

, t he ev i d en ce rev eal ed t h at W hi t es el l an d Bro wn were b o t h a

h eal t hy wei g h t

, d es p i t e wh at ev er s t ru g g l es wi t h po v ert y t he fam il y ex p eri en ced

. Th e

ev i d en ce al s o rev eal ed t h at t h e ch i l d ren were n o t en ro l led i n s ch o o l

, no r d i d W h i t es el l

av ai l hers el f o f o t h er av en u es o f g o v ern m en t as s i s tan ce i n Geo rg ia wh i ch co u l d h av e

p ro v id ed fo o d fo r h er ch il d ren , e v e n t h o u g h s h e had p ri o r ex peri en ce i n acces s i n g

s u ch serv i ces

.

W h i t es el l d o es n ot co n t es t t h at th e v i ct im s were u n der w e i g h t an d

m a l n o u ri s h ed ; rat her, s h e cl ai m s t here i s n o ev i d en ce th at s h e had wi l l fu l i n t en t t o

d ep ri v e t h em o f fo o d as o p po s ed t o a n eg l i g en t d ep ri v at i o n res u l t i n g fro m ex t rem e

p o v ert y

. 3 W e are u n p ers u ad ed

. W h i t es el l co rrect ly s t at es t h at u n d er G eo rg i a l aw, “ [a]

p ers o n wi l l n o t be p res u m ed t o act wi t h cri m in al i nt en t i o n b u t t h e t ri er o f fact s m ay

fi nd s uch i n t en t i o n up o n co n si d erat i o n o f t he wo rd s , co n d u ct

, d em ean o r, m o t i v e, an d

al l o t h er ci rcu m s t an ces co n n ect ed wi t h t he act fo r w h i ch t h e accu s ed i s p ro secu t ed .”

OCGA § 1 6 -2 -6

. Here, h o wev er, t h e ev i d en ce au t h o ri zed a rat i on al t ri er o f fact t o fi n d

t h at

, g i v en J

. W .’ s d o u bl e bl ack ey es , as wel l as t h e d i r e c o n d i t i o n o f t h e v i ct i m s

3 Al t h o u g h W h i t es el l pu rp o rt ed l y ch al len g es t h e s u ffi ci en cy o f t h e ev i d en ce o f

al l o f h er co n v i ct i o n s , s h e m ak es n o arg u m en t s wi t h res p ect t o h er co n v i ct i o n as a

res u l t o f st ri k i n g J

. W

. w i th a p i p e o r fi s t

. Acco rd i n g l y , an y s u ch ch al l en g e h as b een ab an do n ed

. See, e.g ., Pa r ro t t v. S t a t e , 3 1 8 Ga. Ap p

. 5 4 5, 5 4 7 (1 ) n

. 3 (7 36 SE2 d 4 3 6 ) (2 0 1 2).

8co m

p ared t o W h i t es el l ’ s heal t h y co nd i ti o n, h er i n t en t i o n w a s w i l lfu l s u ch t h at h er

co n vi ct i o n s fo r cru el t y

t o ch i ld ren i n t h e fi rs t d eg ree are au th o ri zed . See S a n d er s v.

S t a t e , 28 9 Ga. 6 55

, 6 57 -6 5 8 (1 ) (7 1 5 SE2 d 1 2 4) (2 0 1 1 ), o v erru l ed o n o t h er g ro u nd s

b y P o u n d s v. S t at e , No

. S2 0 A0 4 7 0

, 2 0 2 0 Ga LEXIS 47 7

, * 12 (3 ) (Ga., Ju l y 1

, 2 0 2 0 )

(co n cl u d i n g ev i d en ce was s u ffi ci en t fo r a rat i o n al t ri er of fact t o fi n d ap p el l an t g ui l t y

o f cru el t y t o ch i l d ren as a p red icat e o ffen s e fo r a co n v i ct i o n o f fel o n y m u rd er wh en

t h ere w as ex t en s i v e m ed i cal t es t i m o n y d em o n s t rat i n g ex t rem e m al n o u ri s h m en t an d

ev i d en ce t h at th e v i ct im wo u l d h av e h ad t h e s am e ap p e a r a n c e f o r at l eas t a week

b efo re arri vi n g at t h e ho s p it a l ) ; C o l e m a n v. S t a t e , 3 0 8 G a. Ap p

. 7 3 1

, 7 35 (1 ) (7 0 8

SE2 d 6 3 8 ) (2 0 1 1 ) (fi n d i n g t h at

, i n l i g ht o f ev i d en ce o f ch i l d ’ s s ev erel y m al n o u ri s h ed

co n di t i o n u p o n arri v al at t h e h o s p i t al

, “ [w] h et h er t h e [ap p el l an t s ] wi l fu ll y p erp et rat ed

t h e act cau s i n g [t h e ch i l d v i ct i m ’ s ] co n d it io n was an i s su e fo r t h e ju ry t o res o l v e” an d

t h e j u ry was au t ho ri zed t o fi nd t h e ap p el l an t gu i lt y o f cru el t y t o ch i l d ren ) (ci t a t i o n

o m it t ed ).

2

. W h i t es el l co n t en d s t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n fai l i n g t o qu es t i o n a ju ro r b efo re

rel eas i n g h er fro m

t h e p an el

.

In Geo rg i a,

9t h e t ri al co urt has d i s cret i o n t o rep l ace a ju ro r wi t h a n a l t e r n a t e at an y

t i m e, wh et h er b efo re o r aft er fi n al s u bm i s s i o n o f t h e cas e t o t h e ju ry ,

p ro v i d ed t h e t ri al co u rt h as a s o u nd l eg al b as i s t o d o s o. Th i s Co u rt wi l l

n o t rev ers e a tri al co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n t o rem o ve a ju ro r fro m a p an el ab s en t

an ab u s e o f d i s cret i o n

. A s o u nd b as i s t o rem o v e a ju ro r m ay b e o n e t hat

s erv es t h e l eg al l y

rel ev an t p u rp o s e o f p res erv i n g p ub l i c res p ect fo r th e

i n t eg ri t y o f t h e j ud ici al p ro ces s

. W here t h e bas i s fo r th e j u ro r’ s

i n cap a c i t y i s no t cert ai n o r o b v i o u s , s om e h eari n g o r i n q u i ry i n t o th e

s i tu at i o n i s ap p ro p ri at e t o t h e p ro p er ex erci s e o f ju d i ci al d i s cret i o n

. Di s m i s s al o f a ju ro r wi t h o u t an y fact u al s u p p ort o r fo r a l eg al l y

i rrel ev an t reas on i s p reju d i ci al

.

(Ci t at i o n s an d p un ct u at i on o m i t t ed .) S mi t h v. S ta t e , 3 3 5 Ga. Ap p

. 49 7

, 4 9 8 -4 9 9 (1 )

(7 8 2 SE2 d 3 0 5 ) (2 0 1 6 ); OCGA § 1 5-1 2 -1 7 2

.

Here, p ri o r t o t h e d el i b erat i o n by t h e ju ry , th e tri al co u rt rem o v ed J u ro r 1 4 fro m

t h e p an el an d rep l aced h er w i t h an al tern at e. On t wo occas i o n s t h e t ri al co u rt h ad to

ad d res s J u ro r 1 4 fo r arri v i n g l a t e t o co u rt b y in qu i ri n g w h y th e ju ro r was l at e an d

co n vey in g t h e i m

p o rt an ce o f h er t i m el y arri val

. T he fi rs t t i m e t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n ot

b el i ev e t h at t h e ju ro r’ s d em ean o r i n d i cat ed t h at s he ap p reci at ed t he i m p o rt an ce o f h er

s erv i ce, an d o n t h e s eco n d o ccas i o n t h e ju ro r s t art ed cry i n g wh i l e ex p l ai n i n g h er

t ard i nes s t o t h e ju d g e. Th e t ri al co u rt al s o h ad t o co u ns el J u ro r 1 4 o ne d ay t h at s h e

10was d res s ed i n ap p ro pri at el y fo r co u rt , b u t t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t b as e i t s d eci s i o n to

rem o v e J u ro r 1 4 o n t h i s i ss ue.

Th e t ri al co u rt al s o n ot i ced J u ro r 1 4 ap p eari n g t o fal l as l eep o n m o re t h an o n e

o ccas i o n d u ri n g t h e p res en t at i on o f ev i d en ce. At o ne p o i nt

, d u ri n g t h e t es t i m o n y o f

o n e o f th e fi rs t r e s p o n d ers wh o t reat ed J

. W

. , t h e t ri al co u rt ad d res s ed J u ro r 1 4 to

wak e h er u p

. On a d i fferen t d ay o f t ri al

, an o t h er ju ro r h ad t o n u dg e J u ro r 14 t o wak e

h er u p , t h o u g h Ju r o r 14 d en i ed t o hi m t h at s he h ad b een as l eep

. Th e t ri al co u rt was

co n c e r n e d t hat J u ro r 14 ’ s beh av i o r was b eco m i n g a d i s t ract i on t o t hi s o t h er ju ro r.

Ev en i f t h e ju ro r w as n o t act u al ly as l eep , t he t ri al co u rt o b s erv ed t h at J uro r 1 4 was n ot

p ay i n g at t en ti o n t o t h e ev i d en ce. T h e t r i a l co u rt di d n o t ad d res s t h e i ss u e o f fal l i n g

as l eep wi t h J u ro r 14 ag ai n b ecau s e t h at wo u ld h av e b een t h e fo u rt h o ccas i on t h e t ri al

co u rt h ad i n d iv i d u al l y ch as t i s ed t h e ju ro r. Co u n s el fo r b o t h ap p el l an t s o b ject ed t o t h e

rem o v al o f J u ro r 1 4 fro m t h e p an el

.

W e fi n d t h at

, i n l ig h t of t h e n u m ero us i ss u es p res en t ed b y J u ro r 1 4 an d t h e

n u m b er o f t i m es t h e tri al co u rt h ad t o co un s el t h e ju ro r, t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t ab u s e

i t s d i s cret i o n i n rem o v i n g h er fro m t h e p an el

. See Gi b s o n v. S t a t e , 2 90 Ga. 6

, 1 0 (5 )

(7 1 7 SE2 d 4 4 7 ) (2 0 1 1 ) (h o l di n g t h at

, aft er t h e t ri al co u rt n o ti ced a ju ro r s l eep i n g , an d

u p o n i n q u i ry t o h i m learn ed t h at h e was t ak i n g m ed i cat i on th at m ad e i t d iffi cu l t to

11s t ay awak e, th at “ [t ] h e reco rd

. . . refl ect s t h at t he co u rt co n d u ct ed an i n v es t i g at i o n

i n t o th e ju ro r’ s in ab i l i t y t o p erfo rm h i s d ut i es an d d ev el o p ed a fact u al b as i s f o r i t s

d eci s i o n t o rem o v e t h e ju ro r fo r a l eg al l y rel ev an t p u rp o s e. Bas ed o n t h i s ev i d en ce,

we can n o t s ay t h e t ri al co u rt ab u s ed i t s d i scret i o n in rem o v i n g t h e ju ro r. Becau s e t h e

ju ro r’ s i ncap aci t y was o b v i o u s t o b o t h p art i es , n o ad d i t i on al in q u i ry by t h e t ri al co u rt

was req u i red .”) (ci t at i o n s o m it ted ). M o reo v er, t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t n eed t o co n d u ct

an y fu rt her i n q u i r y o f t h e ju ro r b ecau s e t h e m u l t ip l e b as es fo r t h e ju ro r’ s rem o v al

were ob v i o u s

. Th e t ri al co u rt ’ s co n cern wi t h co nt i n u i ng t o s i ng l e o u t a s p eci fi c ju ro r

wi t h wh o m th ere were o n g o i n g i s s u es was a v al i d o n e. Fi n al l y , t h i s ju ro r was

rem o v ed p ri o r to ju ry d el ib erat io n s , s o th ere i s n o co n cern t h at s h e was t arg et ed as a

h o l d -o u t ju ro r p rev en ti n g a co n vi ct i o n

. See S t at e v. Ba ker

, 35 1 Ga. Ap p

. 7 2 5, 7 2 8 (1 )

(8 3 2 SE2 d 8 7 3 ) (2 0 1 9) ( “ b o t h t h e n eed fo r i nv es t ig at io n an d t he p o ss i b i l i t y o f

h arm fu l erro r are h ei g ht en ed wh en a ju ry h as b eg u n d el i b erat i o n s o r wh en a ju ry i s

d ead lo ck ed ”) (ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

3

. W h i t es el l co n t en d s t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y fai li n g t o d efi n e “ wi l l fu l l y

d ep ri v es ” in i t s ju ry ch arg es wh en i n s t ru ct i n g th e j u ry as t o t h e cri m e o f cru el ty to

ch i l d ren i n t h e fi rs t d eg ree. W e d i s ag ree.

12Th e t ri al co urt ch arg ed t h e ju ry on t h e e l e m en t s o f t h e cri m e o f cru el t y to

ch i l d ren i n t h e fi rs t d eg ree, s t at i n g t h at

[a] p aren t

, g u ard i an , o r o th er p ers o n s u p erv i s i n g t h e w el fare o f o r h av i n g

i m m ed i at e ch a rg e o r cu s t o d y o f a ch il d u n d er t h e ag e o f ei g h teen

co m m i t s t h e o ffen s e o f cru el t y t o ch i ld r e n i n t h e fi rs t d eg ree

. . . wh en

s u ch p ers o n wi l l fu l l y d ep ri v es a ch i l d o f n eces s ary s u s t en an ce t o th e

ex t en t t h at t h e ch il d ’ s h eal t h o r wel l -b ei n g i s jeo p ard ized

.

Th e t ri al co u rt fu rt her d efi n ed t h e t erm “ s u s t en an ce,” b u t d i d n o t d e f i n e t h e

t erm “ wi ll fu ll y d ep ri v es .” Becau s e W h i t es el l d i d n o t req u es t t h i s t erm b e d efi n ed an d

d i d n o t o b

je c t t o t h e ch arg e as g i v en , we rev i ew t h i s en u m erat i o n fo r p l ai n erro r.

Ch ed d er s i ng h v. S t a t e , 2 9 0 Ga. 6 8 0 , 6 8 2 -6 8 3 (2 ) (7 2 4 SE2 d 3 6 6 ) (2 0 1 2).

[T] h e t es t fo r d et erm i n i n g wh et h er t h e r e i s p l ai n erro r i n ju ry

i n s t ru ct i o ns u n d er OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 8 (b ) [i s ] as fo l l o w s

. Fi rs t

, t h ere m u s t

b e an erro r o r d efect

– so m e s o rt o f d ev i at io n fro m a l eg al ru le

– t h at h as

n o t b een i n t en t i o nal l y rel i n q u i s h ed o r ab an do n ed

, i

. e., affi rm at i v el y

wai v ed

, b y t h e ap p el l an t

. Seco n d, t h e leg al erro r m u s t b e c l e a r o r

o b v i o u s , rat h er t h an s u b

j ect to reas o n ab le d i s p u t e. Th i rd

, t h e erro r m u s t

h av e affec t ed t h e ap p el l an t ’ s s u b s t an t i al ri g h t s , wh i ch i n t h e ord i n ary

cas e m ean s [s h e] m

u s t d em o n s t rat e t hat i t affect ed t h e o u t co m e o f th e

t ri al co u rt p ro ceed i n g s

. Fo u rt h an d fi n al l y , if t h e ab o v e th ree p ro n gs are

s at i s fi ed

, t h e ap p el l at e co u rt h as t h e d i s cret i on t o r e m ed y th e

erro r— d i s cret io n wh i ch ou g h t to be ex erci s ed o n l y i f t h e erro r s eri o us l y

13affect s t h e fai rn es s, i n t eg ri t y or p u b li c rep u t at i o n o f ju d i ci al

p ro ceed i n g s

.

(Ci t at i o n s an d em

p h as i s o m i tt ed .) Id . at 6 83 (2 ).

W e fi n d t h at W h i t e s e l l f a i l s t h e s eco n d an d t h ird p ro n g s o f t h e p lai n erro r

an al y s i s b ecau se t he “ t ri al co u rt i s n o t req u i red to i n s tru ct o n t h e m ean in g o f al l wo rd s

u s e d i n t h e ch arg e, part i cu l arl y wo rd s o f co m m o n u n d ers t an d i n g .” (Ci tat i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n om i tt ed .) Pi

p p en v. S t a t e , 2 9 9 Ga. 7 1 0

, 7 1 4 (2 ) (c) (7 91 SEd 7 95 ) (2 0 1 6 ).

“ Th u s , [W hi t es el l ] h as fai l ed to s h o w t hat n o t fu rt h er d efi ni n g ‘ wi ll fu ll y d ep ri v es ’

was an o b v i o u s erro r o r l i k el y affect ed t he o u t co m e of t h e p ro ceed in g s

. ” Id

. (fi n d i n g

n o p l ai n erro r i n fai l i n g t o s u a s p o n t e defi n e “ w i l lfu l ly d ep ri v es ” in d efi n i n g t h e

e l e m e n t s o f t h e el d er cru el t y s t at u te). In d eed

, l o o k i n g at th e ch arg e as a wh o l e, t h e

j u ry was p ro p erl y i n s t ru ct ed th at t o co nv i ct W hi t es el l o f t h e cri m e o f cru e l t y t o

ch i l d ren i n t h e fi rs t deg ree, t h e St at e h ad t h e b u rd en t o p ro v e t h e req u i si t e i n t en t

b ey o n d a reas o n ab le d o u b t as t o each v i ct i m

. See Ca r r v

. S t a t e , 3 5 0 Ga. Ap p

. 4 6 1,

4 6 7 (2 ) (8 2 9 SE2 d 6 4 1 ) ( 2 0 1 9 ) (“ It i s wel l es t ab l i s h ed t h at ju ry ch arg es can n o t b e

v i ewed i n i s o lat i o n

. Rat h er, i n d et erm i n in g wh et h er t he r e was p l ai n erro r, ju ry ch arg es

m u st b e read an d co n s i d ered as a wh o l e.”) (ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

144

. L as t l y , W h i t es el l co n ten d s h er t ri al co u n s el ren dered i n effect i ve as s i s t an ce

i n s ev eral reg ard s . Ag ai n , we d i s ag ree.

In Geo rg i a,

[t ] o prev ai l o n a cl ai m o f i n effect i ve as s i s tan ce o f co u n s el

, a d efen d an t

m u s t s h ow t h a t c o u n s el ’ s p erfo rm an ce was d efi ci en t an d t hat th e

d efi ci en t p erfo rm an ce s o p reju di c e d t h e d efen d an t t h at th ere i s a

reas o n ab l e l ik el i h o o d t h at , b u t fo r co u n s el ’ s erro rs , t h e o u t co m e o f t he

t ri al wo u l d h av e b een d i fferen t

. S tr i ckl an d v. W as h i n g t on , 4 6 6 U. S. 6 6 8

, 6 8 7 (III) (1 04 SCt 2 0 5 2, 8 0 LEd 2d 6 7 4 ) (1 98 4 ). If an ap p el l an t fai l s t o

m eet h is o r h er b u rd en o f p ro v i n g ei t her p ro n g o f t h e S t r i ckl a n d tes t

, th e

rev i ewi ng co u rt do es n o t h av e t o ex am i ne t h e o t h er p ro n g

. In rev i ewi n g

t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n , we accep t t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s fact ual fi n di n g s an d

cred ib i l i t y d et erm i n at i on s u n l e s s c l e a r l y e r r o n e o u s , b u t we

i n d ep 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

. Fu rt h erm o re, t h ere

i s a s t ro n g pres u m

p t i on t h at t h e perfo rm an ce o f co u n sel was w i t hi n th e

wi d e ran g e o f reas o n ab l e p ro fes s i o nal l awy eri n g , an d we can n o t reach

a co n t rary co n cl u s i o n u n l es s defen d an t s u cces s fu ll y reb u t s th e

p res u m p t i o n b y cl ear an d co n v i nci n g ev i d en ce.

. . . [D] eci s i o n s

reg ard i n g t r i al t act i cs an d s t rat eg y m ay fo rm t he bas i s fo r an

i n effect iv en es s cl ai m o n ly i f t h ey were s o pat en t l y u n reas o nab l e t hat n o

co m p et en t at t o rn ey wo u l d h av e fo l l o w ed s u ch a co urs e.

15(Ci t at i o n s an d p u nct u at io n o m i t t ed .) W a l ker

, 34 9 Ga. Ap p

. at 1 9 2 -1 9 3 (4 ). W i t h t h i s

fram ewo rk i n m in d

, we rev i ew W h i t es el l ’ s in d i v i du al en u m erat i o n s o f i n effect i v e

as s i s tan ce. 4

a

. S i bl in g

s

At t ri al

, J

. W

. an d M

. B. t es t i fi ed

. Th e o t h er t wo v i ct i m s , N. M

. an d T. M

., d id

n o t t es t i fy

, n o r were t h ei r fo ren s i c i n t erv i ews pl ay ed

. T h e S t a t e rel i ed o n t h e

t es t i m o ny o f a d o ct or wh o ex am i n ed t h em t o es t ab l i s h t h e co n di t i o n o f t h o s e ch i l d ren

at th e t i m e o f W h it es el l ’ s arres t

. W h i t s el l co n t en ds h er t ri al co u ns el was i n effect i v e

fo r fai li n g t o cal l t h es e ch i l dren as w i t nes s es i n l ig h t o f p u rp ort ed co n t rad i ct i o n s in

t h ei r fo ren s i c i n t erv i ews . W e d i s ag ree.

W h i t es el l ’ s t ri al co un s el t es t i fi ed at t h e m o t i on fo r n ew t ri al h eari n g

. A l t h o u g h

s h e i n i t i al l y i n t en d ed t o p u rs u e bri n g i n g th es e v i ct i m s fro m o u t -o f-s t at e t o t es t i fy

, s h e

u l t i m at el y

d eci d ed n o t t o d o s o

. Sh e t es t i fi ed th at N. M . an d T. M . were l i vi n g wi th

t h ei r fat h er, wh o was v ery an g ry ab o ut wh at h ap p en ed to t h e ch il d ren , an d wh o

refu sed t o s p eak wi th an y o n e o n b eh al f o f W h i t es el l ’ s d efen s e t eam

. W h i t es el l ’ s t ri al

4 W h i tes el l al l eg es as erro r t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s fai l u re t o u s e t he co rrect s t an d ard

t o an al y ze h er i n effect i v e as s i s t an ce cl ai m , b u t a rev i ew o f t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er d em o n s t rat es th at t h e tri al co u rt ap p l i ed t h e S tr i ckl an d s t an d ard

. A c c o r d i n g l y , t h i s

en u m erat i o n l eav es n o t h i n g fu rt h er fo r o u r rev i ew.

16co u ns el m ad e t h e s t rat eg i c d eci s i o n n o t t o cal l th es e ch i l dren as wi t n es s es becau s e s h e

was co n cern ed t h ei r t es t i m on y , wh i ch sh e wo ul d n o t k n ow i n a d v a n c e , co u l d b e

h arm fu l d u e t o co ach in g o r t ai n t i n g b y t h ei r an g ry fat her. W e d o n o t fi n d t h e s t rat eg i c

d eci s i o n n o t t o cal l t h es e ch i l d ren as wi t n es s es so u nreas o n ab le t h at n o co m p et en t

at t o rn ey w o u l d h av e ad o p t ed i t. Acco rd in gl y , it d o e s n o t f o rm t h e b as i s fo r a cl ai m

fo r i n effect i ve as s i st an ce of co un s el

. S e e , e .g ., Ho wa r d v. S t at e , 3 4 0 Ga. Ap p

. 1 3 3,

1 4 0 (3 ) (a) (7 9 6 SE2 d 7 5 7 ) (2 0 1 7 ) (“ [T] h e d eci s i o n o n wh i ch d efen se w i t nes s es wi l l

b e cal led i s a m at t er o f tri al s t rat eg y an d t a c t i c s a n d d o es n o t u su al l y co n s t i t u t e

i n effect i v e as s i s t an ce o f co u n s el

. In d eed

, w h i c h wi t n es s es t o cal l an d al l o t h er

s t rat eg i es an d t act i cal d eci s i on s are t h e ex cl u si v e p ro vi n ce o f th e l awy er a f t e r

co n su l t at i o n wi t h h is cl i en t, an d wh et h er an at t o rn ey ’ s t ri al t act i cs are reas o n ab l e i s

a q u es ti o n o f l aw, n o t fact .”) (ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ). 5

b

. Remo ved

Ju r or

W h i t es el l co n t en d s t h at h er t ri al co un s el was i n effect i ve fo r fai li n g t o req u es t

t h at t h e tri al co u rt qu es t i o n J u ro r 1 4 b e f o re rem o v in g h er fro m t h e p an el

. Fo r t h e

5 T h e reco rd is si l en t as t o wh et h er W h i t es el l ’ s co u ns el co n su l t ed wi t h h er ab o ut t h e d eci s i o n n o t t o cal l t h es e ch i l d ren as wi t n es s es , b ut t h i s d o es no t ch an g e o u r

an al y s i s b ecau se i t was W hi t es el l ’ s b u rd en t o reb u t t h e p res u m p t i o n t h at h er co u n s el

reas on ab l y

rep res en t ed h er. See W

a l ker

, 3 4 9 Ga. Ap p. at 1 92 (4 ).

17reas on s d i s cu ss ed m o re fu l l y i n D i v i s i o n 2

, t h e t ri al co u rt was n o t req u i red to

i n t erv i ew J u ro r 1 4 b efo re d i s m i s s i n g h er fro m th e p an el . Acco rd i n gl y , t ri al co u n s el

was n o t d efi ci en t fo r fai l i n g to s eek an in t erv i ew o f J u ro r 1 4

, as t h e t ri al co u rt wo u ld

h av e b een au t h o ri zed t o ex erci s e i t s d i s cret i on t o reject s u ch a req u es t. See Fl a n n i g a n

v. S t a t e , 3 0 5 Ga. 5 7

, 6 1 (2 ) (b ) (8 2 3 SE2 d 7 4 3 ) (2 0 19 ) (t ri al co u ns el ’ s p erfo rm an ce

was n o t d efi ci en t fo r fai l i n g to i m p each a wi t n es s wi t h ev id en ce t h e tri al co u rt co u ld

h av e ex cl u d ed i n i t s d i s cret i o n ).

c. Ju ry Ch a r

g e f o r Reckl es s Co n d

u ct

Las t ly

, W hi t es el l co n t en d s t h at h er t ri al co un s el w as i n effect i v e fo r fai l i n g to

req u es t a ju ry ch arg e fo r reck les s co n d u ct gi v en t h e defen s e s t rat eg y th at W h i t es el l ’ s

co n du ct was , at wo rs t, n eg l i g en t rat h er t h an wi l l fu l

. W e fi n d t h at W h i t es el l s u ffered

n o p reju d i ce.

Geo rg i a’ s reck l es s co n d uct s t at u t e p ro v i d es t hat

[a] p ers o n wh o cau s es bo d i ly h arm t o o r en d an g ers t h e b o di ly s afet y o f

an o t her p e r s o n b y co n s ci o u s l y d i s reg ard i n g a s ub s tan t i al an d

u n ju st i f i a b l e ri s k t h at h is act o r o m i s s i o n wi l l cau se h arm o r en d an g er

t h e s afet y o f t h e o t h e r p ers o n an d t h e d i s reg ard co n s t i t u t es a g ro s s

d ev i at i o n fro m t h e s t a n d a r d o f care wh i ch a reas o n ab l e p ers o n w o u l d

ex erci s e i n t h e s i t u at io n i s g u i l t y o f a m i s d em ean o r.

18OCGA § 1 6 -5 -6 0 (b ). “ [R] eck l es s co nd u ct m ay be a l es s er in cl u d ed o ffen s e o f cru el t y

t o ch i l d ren , i f th e h arm t o th e ch il d res ul t ed fro m cri m i n a l n e g l i g en ce rat h er t h an

m al i ci ou s o r wi l l fu l co n d u ct .” S h a h v. S t a te

, 3 0 0 Ga

. 1 4

, 1 9 (2 ) (7 9 3 SE2 d 8 1 )

(2 0 1 6).

W h i t es el l rel i es o n S

h a h fo r t h e p ro p o s i t i o n t h at h er t ri al co u n s el was d efi ci en t

fo r fai l i n g t o req u es t t h e ju ry b e ch arg ed w i t h t h e op t i o n t o co n v ict h er o f t h e l es s er

i n cl u d ed ch arg e o f r e c k l e s s co n d u ct

. In S h a h

, t h e ap p el l an t o ft en rel i ed o n h er 1 4

-

y ear-o ld ch i l d t o care fo r h er i nfan t

, wh o h ad m ed ical i s s u es as a res u l t o f h av i n g b een

b o rn prem at u rel y

. 3 0 0 Ga. at 1 4-1 5 (1 ) (a). T h e ren t al h o m e t h e fam i l y l iv ed i n h ad

a m al fu n ct i o ni ng ai r co n d i t i o ni n g u n i t d u ri n g a p eri o d o f t i m e wh en th e weat h er was

v ery h o t

. Id

. at 1 5 (1 ) (a). Th e ap p el l an t l eft t he h o m e an d g a v e t h e t e e n ag er

i n s t ru ct i o n s ab o u t feed i n g t h e i n fan t; h owev er, th e t een ag er fel l as leep

, an d t h e n ex t

t i m e an yo n e ch eck ed o n t he i n fan t s he was d eceas ed

. Id

. Th e ch i l d d i ed o f

d eh y d rat i o n an d p o s s i b l e h yp e r t h e rm i a. Id

. at 14 (1 ) (b ). Al t h o u g h t h e m ed i cal

ex am i n er ru led t h e d eat h an acci d en t

, o t h er p h y s i ci an s t es t i fi ed t h at t h e s l o w wei g ht

g ai n o f t h e ch i l d s h o u l d h av e al ert ed t h e ap p el l an t t o a p ro b lem an d dem o n s t rat ed

g rad u al s t arv at i o n o f t h e i nfan t

. Id

. at 1 5 -1 8 (1 ) (b ). Th e ap p el l an t ’ s co u n s el req u es t ed

a ju ry ch arg e of reck l es s co n d u ct

, wh i ch t h e t ri al co urt d en i ed

. Id

. at 1 9 (2 ). Th e

19Su p rem e Co urt rev ers ed

, fi nd i n g t h a t t h e f a i l u re t o g i v e t he l es s er i n cl u d ed ch arg e

was h arm fu l b ecau s e t h e ev i den ce t h at th e ap p el l an t wi l l fu l l y d ep ri ved h er ch i l d o f

s u s t en an ce was no t o verwh el m i n g i n l i g h t o f th e ev i d en ce t h at s h e b el iev ed t h at h er

t een ag e d au g h ter was ap p ro p ri at el y cari n g fo r t h e i n fan t . Id . at 2 2 (2 ) (b ).

Th e p ro ced u ral p o s t u re an d fact s o f S ha h are d i s t i n gu i s h ab l e fro m t h e p res en t

cas e. Fi rs t

, we are n o t d et erm i n i n g wh et h er t he ch arg e o f reck l e s s c o n d u ct s h o u ld

h av e b een g i v en –

as was t h e cas e i n S

h a h

– b u t rat h er we are d et erm i n i n g wh et h er

W h i t es el l ’ s t ri al co u n s el was i n effect i v e fo r fai l i n g t o req u es t t he ch arg e. Seco n d

, t h e

fact s o f t he p res en t cas e are far m o re eg reg i o u s t h an t h o s e p res en t i n S h a h

. Th i s cas e

i n v o l v es fo u r ch i l d ren wh o were s i g n ifi can t l y un d erwei gh t fo r t h ei r ag es wh i l e

Wh i t e s e l l m ai n t ai n ed a h eal t h y wei g h t

. It fu rt h er s h o ws t h at W hi t es el l

, wh o

p rev i o u s l y recei v ed g o v e rn m en t as s is t an ce t o feed her ch i l d ren , ab an do n ed s u ch

a s s i s t a n c e an d k ep t t he ch i l d ren o u t o f s ch o o l

. On e o f t h e ch i l d ren h ad ev i d en ce o f

cu rren t an d p as t p h y s i cal ab u s e, was v i s i b ly s k el et al at t h e t i m e o f h er ad m i s s i o n t o

t h e h o s pi t al an d was s u fferi n g fro m co n d i ti o n s res u l ti n g fro m h av i n g in ad eq u at e fo o d

fo r a p ro l o ng ed p eri o d o f ti m e, h ad n o t eat en i n t wo week s , was kn o w n t o st eal fo o d

f ro m her o wn ho m e, an d was p u n is h ed by b ei n g d ep ri v ed of fo o d

. In c o n t r a s t

, i n

S h a h

, t h ere was co nfl i ct in g ev i den ce ab o u t th e n at u re o f t h e i n fan t ’ s d eat h as wel l as

20ev i d en ce t hat t h e ap p el l an t b el i ev ed t hat s o m eo n e el s e was ad eq u at el y f e e d i n g t h e

ch i l d

.

Ac c o r d i n gl y , p ret erm i t t i n g wh et h er t ri al co u n s el was d efi ci en t fo r fai l i n g to

req u es t a ju ry ch arg e fo r reck l es s co n d u ct bas ed o n S h ah

, here, un l i k e S

h a h

, t h e

ev i d en ce t h at W h i t es el l wi l l f u l l y d ep ri v ed h e r ch i l d ren of s u s t en an ce i s

o v erwh el m i ng

. As a res u l t

, W h i t es el l can n ot d em o n s t rat e th at sh e was p reju d i ced by

t h e fai l u re t o req u es t th e ju ry ch arg e. See Bo cci a v. S t a t e , 3 3 5 G a. Ap p

. 6 8 7

, 6 9 0 -6 9 1

(1 ) (7 8 2 SE2 d 7 9 2 ) (2 0 1 6 ) (“ If a d efen d an t b a s e s h i s i n effect iv en es s cl ai m o n t ri al

co u ns el ’ s fai l u re to req u es t a ch arg e o n a cert ai n d efen s e, i t i s i rrel ev an t w h et h er t h e

t ri al co u rt wo u l d h av e b een req u i red t o g i v e s u ch a ch arg e ab s en t a req u es t . Rat h er,

t h e ap p ro p ri at e i n qu i ry i s wh et h er t ri al co u n sel p ro v i d ed d efi ci en t rep res en t at i o n in

fai l i n g t o req u es t t h e ch arg e, an d if s o , wh et h er t h e d efen d an t can m eet t h e p reju d i ce

p ro n g o f S t r i ckl a n d v. W

a sh i ng t o n

. In m ak i n g t h e lat t er d et erm i n at i o n , t he rel ev an t

i n q u i ry i s wh e t h e r t h e ch arg e, i f i t h ad b een req u es t ed

, was warran t ed b y t h e

ev i d en c e , a n d i f i t h ad b een g i v en , wh et h er t h ere i s a reas o n ab l e pro b ab il i t y t h at i t

wo u l d h av e ch an g ed t h e o ut co m e o f th e t ri al .”) (ci t at i o n o m i tt ed ); see al s o Da u g h t r y

v. S ta t e , 2 9 6 Ga. 8 4 9

, 85 9 (2 ) (g ) (7 7 0 SE2 d 8 6 2 ) (2 0 15 ) (“ [W ] e co n cl u d e t h at

, . . .

b ecau s e o f t h e o v erwh el m i n g ev i d en ce o f Ap p el l an t ’ s g u i l t

, t h ere i s n o t a reas o n ab l e

21p ro b ab i l i t y t hat

, i f t h e t ri al co urt had [g i v en ] t h e ch arg e at Ap p el l an t ’ s beh es t

, t h e

o u t c o m e o f t h e t ri al wo u l d h av e b een m ore fav o rab le t o h i m .”); Gl a ss v. S t a t e , 2 8 9

Ga

. 5 4 2, 5 4 8 (6 ) (c) (7 1 2 SE2 d 85 1 ) (2 0 1 1) (“ Th ere i s n o ev i d en ce as to wh i ch

wi t n es s es v i o l at ed t h e ru l e [o f s eq u es t rat i o n] an d w h e t h e r t h ey act u al l y tes t i fi ed o r

s p o k e ab o u t t h ei r t es t i m o n y

. M o reo v er, ev en as s u m in g t h at t ri al co u n s el ’ s fai l u re to

req u es t a ju ry ch arg e on v i o lat i o n o f t h e ru l e co n s t i t u t ed d efi ci en t p erfo rm an ce, Gl as s

can n ot d em o ns t r a t e p reju d i ce i n l i gh t o f t h e o v erwh el m i n g ev i d en ce s u b s t an t i at i n g

h i s g u i l t .”) (ci tat i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

Ca s e No . A2 0

A1 3 5 6

5

. Bro wn co n t en d s th at t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n ex cl u d i n g ev i d en ce o f t h e h eart

at t ack h e s u ffered i n j ai l

, wh i ch wo u l d hav e ex p l ai n ed hi s w ei g ht l os s b y t h e t i m e o f

t ri al . W e d i s ag ree.

It i s n o t d i s p u ted t h at w hi l e i n jai l a w a i t i n g t r i al o n t he ch arg es i n t h i s cas e,

Bro w n su ffered a h eart at t ack an d l o s t w ei g h t as a res u l t

. Bro wn s o u g h t t o in t ro d uce

ev i d en ce o f t h e heart at t ack t o ex p l ai n h i s w ei g h t l o s s s in ce t h e t i m e o f h i s arres t

, b ut

t h e t ri al co u rt ex cl u ded t he ev i d en ce as i rrel ev an t

. T h e t ri al co u rt d id p erm i t nu m ero u s

wi t n es s es t o t es t ify t h at

, at t he t i m e o f h i s arres t, Bro wn w ei g h ed l es s t h an h e u s u al l y

d i d

.

22Geo rg i a law p ro v i d es t h at ‘” r e l e v an t ev i d en ce’ m ean s ev id en ce h av i n g an y

t en d en cy t o m ak e t h e ex i s ten ce o f an y fact t h at is o f co n s eq u en ce t o t he d et erm i n at i o n

o f t h e act i o n m o re p ro bab l e o r l es s p ro b ab l e t han i t w o u l d b e wi t h o u t th e ev i d en ce.”

OCGA § 2 4-4 -4 01

. “ Th e t ri al co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n wh et h er t o ad m it o r ex cl ud e ev i d en ce

wi l l n ot b e d i s t urb ed on ap p eal ab s en t an ab u s e o f d i s cret i o n

. ” (Ci tat i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed .) Jo n es v. S t a t e , 3 0 5 Ga. 7 5 0 , 7 5 1 (2 ) (8 2 7 SE2 d 8 7 9 ) (2 0 1 9 ).

[I] f an i t em o f ev i d en ce h as a t en d en cy t o h el p es tab l i s h a fact i n i s su e,

t h at i s s u ffi ci en t t o m ak e i t rel ev a n t an d ad m i s s i b l e. Ev id en ce o f

d o u b t fu l rel ev an cy o r co m p et en cy s ho u l d b e ad m it t ed an d i t s w ei g h t l eft

t o t h e ju ro rs . Irrel ev an t m at t er, h o wev er, s h o u ld b e ex cl u d ed

.

Hi ckey v. S t a te , 3 2 5 Ga. Ap p . 4 9 6 , 4 9 8 (1 ) (7 5 3 SE2 d 1 4 3 ) (2 0 13 ).

H e re, t h e ev id en ce o f Bro wn ’ s wei gh t l o s s p ri o r t o h i s arres t was ce r t a i n l y

rel ev an t

, as it s u p p o rt ed h is d efen s e th at

, in ad di t i o n t o t h e ch i l d ren , he w as al s o

s u fferi n g p h y s i cal co n seq uen ces as a res u l t o f po v ert y -i n d u ced m al n o uri s h m en t

, s o

as t o s ug g es t t h at h i s co n d u ct was no t wi l l fu l

. In ot h er wo rd s , Bro wn ’ s p ri o r wei g ht

as co m p ared t o h i s wei g h t at t h e t i m e o f h i s arres t was rel ev an t t o t h e i s s ue of i n t en t

.

Hi s wei g h t aft er t h e t i m e wh en t h e cr i m e s a g a i n s t t h e ch i l d ren o ccu rred

, h o wev er,

was wh o l l y i rrel ev an t t o t he i s s u e o f in t en t, o r an y ot h e r i s s u e i n t h e cas e.

Acco rd in g ly

, t h e t ri al co urt d i d n o t a b u s e it s d i s cret i o n i n k eep i n g t h i s i rrel ev an t

23ev i d en ce fro m t h e j u ry

. See Hi cke y , 3 2 5 G a

. Ap p

. at 4 9 8 (1 ) (h o l d in g t h at t h e t ri al

co u rt d id n o t ab u s e i t s d i s cret i o n i n ex cl u di n g ev i d en ce o f t h e co m p arat i v e

p u n i s h m e n t s recei v ed by th e co m b at an t s i n a p ri s o n fi g h t b ecau se, co n t rary to

ap p el l an t ’ s co n ten t i o n , p os t -fi g h t m at t ers were n o t rel ev an t t o t he is s u e o f t h e

ap p el l an t ’ s i nt en t d u ri n g t h e fi g h t).

6

. Bro w n co nt en d s t hat t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n rem ov i n g J u ro r 1 4 fro m t h e

p an el

. Fo r t h e reas o n s d i s cu s s ed m o re fu l l y i n Di v i s i on 2

, t h i s arg um en t i s m eri t l es s

.

7

. Las t l y , B r o w n co n t en d s t hat h is t ri al co un s el was i n effect i v e fo r fai l i n g to

req u es t a ju ry ch arg e fo r t h e l es s er i ncl u d ed o ffen s e o f reck l es s co n d u ct

. As d i s cu s s ed

i n Di v is i o n 4 (c), t hi s arg um en t i s wi t h o u t m eri t

.

Ju d g men t s a f f i r med i n Ca s e No

. A2 0

A1 3 5 6 a n d A2 0

A1 3 5 8

. McFa d

d en

, C. J.,

a n d Do yl e, P. J., co n cu r

.

24