THI RD DI VI SI ON DOYLE, P. J.

, REESE and BROWN, 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.

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

.

June 18, 2021



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A2 1 A0 18 4 . CW IK v . THE STATE.

R E E S E
, J u d g e.

In 2 01 8

, a H a l l Co u n t y ju ry fo u n d M at t h ew Cwi k gu i l t y o f on e co u n t o f

ag g rav at ed ch il d m ol es t at i o n an d fi v e co u n t s o f ch il d m o les t at io n. 1 Cwi k f i l e d an

am en d ed m o t i on fo r n ew t ri al

, wh i ch th e t ri al co u rt d en i ed

, an d th i s ap p eal fo l l o wed

.

Cwi k as sert s t h at th e tri al co u rt erred i n den y i n g hi s m o t i o n b ecau s e t h e ev id en ce was

i n s u ffi ci en t t o es t ab l i s h ven u e, h e recei v ed i n effect i v e as s i s t an ce o f co u n s el

, h e was

p reju d i ced wh en an e-m ai l was i n ad v ert en tl y d i s p lay ed b efo re th e ju ry , an d t h e v i ct i m

s h o u ld no t h av e b een al l o we d t o t es t i fy i n h er m i l i t ary u n i fo rm

. Fo r t h e reas o n s s et

fo rt h i nfra, we affi rm

t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s ru l i n g.

1 OCGA § § 1 6 -6 -4 (a), (c).Vi ewed i n t h e l i g h t m o s t fav o rab le t o t he ju ry ’ s v erd i ct

, 2 t h e reco rd s h o ws t h e

fo l l o w i n g

. Th e vi ct i m , A. B., fi rs t m et Cwi k wh en s h e w as ap p ro xi m at el y n i n e o r t en

ye a r s o ld wh en Cwi k beg an d at i n g h er m ot h er. Cwi k m arri ed A

. B.’ s m o t h e r

ap p ro x i m at el y o n e y ear l at er. Al t h o u g h A. B. d id n o t rem em b er ex act l y wh en Cwi k

fi rs t s t art ed t o u ch i n g h er in ap p ro p ri at el y , s h e t es ti fi ed t h at s h e was “ 1 1 o r 1 2

, 1 3 at

t h e o l d es t m ay

be.” Th e t o uch i n g s t art ed o v er h er cl ot h es , b u t ev en t u al l y Cwi k b eg an

t o u ch i n g h er d i rect ly

o n h er b reas t s , v ag i n a, an d an u s wi t h h i s h an d s an d m o u t h , i n

ad d it i o n t o h av i n g h e r t o u c h h i s p en i s. Th e ab u s e o ccu rred in th e fam i l y h o m e,

“ [ u ]s u al l y i n [A. B.’ s ] ro o m [,] ” wh i l e h er m o t h er was wo rk i n g , an d co n t i n u ed

reg u l arl y u n t i l A. B. was 1 4

. A. B. u l ti m at el y di s cl o s ed t h e ab u s e t o h er s ch o ol

co u n se lor

. S ubse que n tly

, th e Di v i s i o n o f Fam i l y an d Ch i l d ren Serv i ces (“ D FCS”) an d

t h e Hal l Co u n ty

s h eri ff’ s o ffi ce were cal l ed i n t o i n v es t i g at e t h e al l eg at i o ns

.

A Hal l Co u n t y gran d ju ry i n d i ct ed Cwi k o n o n e co u nt o f ag g rav at ed ch i ld

m o les t at i o n , fi v e co u n t s o f ch i ld m o l es t at i o n , an d on e co u n t o f i n ces t

. 3 At t ri al

, o v er

Cwi k’ s o b

ject i o n , t h e c o u rt p erm i t t ed A. B. t o t es ti fy wh i l e weari n g h er Nat i o n al

2 See Ja cks o n v. Vi r

g i n i a , 4 4 3 U. S. 3 0 7

, 31 9 (III) (B) (9 9 SCt 2 78 1

, 6 1 LE2 d

5 6 0 ) (1 9 7 9 ); Ra nki n v. S t a t e , 2 7 8 Ga. 7 0 4, 7 0 5 (6 0 6 SE2 d 2 6 9 ) (2 0 0 4).

3 OCGA § § 1 6 -6 -4 (a), (c); 1 6 -6 -2 2 (a).

2Gu ard u n i fo rm , b u t i t p ro vi ded a l i m i t i n g i ns t ru ct i o n t o t h e ju ry

. Aft er t h e ju ry fo u n d

Cwi k g ui l t y o f al l ch arg es ex cep t t h e o n e co un t of in ces t

, th e t ri al co u rt s en t en ced h i m

t o l ife, wi t h t h e fi rs t 4 0 y ears t o b e s erv ed i n co n fi n em en t

.

On ap p eal

, t h e ap p el lat e co urt rev i ews a ch al l en g e t o th e

s u ffi ci en cy o f t h e v en u e ev i d en ce ju s t l i k e i t rev iews a ch al l en g e t o th e

ev i d en ce o f g u i l t : w e vi ew t h e ev i den ce of v en u e i n a l i g h t m o s t

fav o rab le t o s u p p o rt t h e v erd i ct an d det erm i n e wh et h er t h e ev i d en ce w as

s u ffi ci en t t o p e r m i t a rat i o n al t ri er of fact t o fi n d b ey on d a reas o n ab l e

d o u b t t h at t h e cri m e w as co m m it t ed i n t h e co u n t y

wh ere t h e d efen d an t

was i n di ct ed

. 4

Fu rt h er, “ [i ] n rev iewi n g a tri al co u rt ’ s d et erm i n at i o n reg ard i n g a cl ai m o f i n effect i v e

as s i s tan ce of co u n s el

, t h i s co u rt u p h o l d s t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s fact u al fi nd i n g s u nl es s t h ey

are cl earl y err o n e o u s ; w e rev i ew a t ri al co u rt ’ s l eg al co n cl u s i o n s de n o v o

. ” 5

Ad d i t i o n al l y , “ wh ere t here is n o p ro s ecu t o ri al m i sco n d u ct an d t h e b as i s fo r a m i s t ri al

i s t he effect o f ou t s i d e in fl u en ces o n t he ju ry , a t ri al co u rt h as b ro ad d i s cret i o n in

4 Oa t es v. S ta te

, 3 5 5 Ga. Ap p

. 3 0 1

, 3 0 4 (2 ) (8 4 4 SE2 d 2 3 9 ) (2 0 20 ) (ci tat i o n an d

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

5 Bu b r i ck v. S t a t e , 2 93 Ga. Ap p

. 5 0 2

, 5 04 (3 ) (6 6 7 SE2 d 6 6 6 ) (2 0 0 8 ) (p u n ct u at i o n an d fo o t n o t e o m i t t ed ).

3d eci d i n g wh et h er t o gran t a m i s t ri al [.] ” 6 Fi n al ly

, t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d eci si o n t o al l o w a

v i ct i m t o t es t i fy i n h er m i l i t ary u n i f o r m i s r ev i ewed fo r ab us e o f d i s cret i o n

. 7 W i th

t h es e g u i d i n g p ri n ci p l es i n m in d , we n o w t urn t o Cwi k’ s cl ai m s o f erro r.

1

. Cwi k arg u es t h at t h e ev i d en ce p res en t ed at t r i a l w a s i n su ffi ci en t t o p ro v e

v en ue b ey o n d a reas o n ab l e d o u b t

. A cco rd i n g t o Cwi k

, t h e St at e fai l ed t o es t ab l i s h

v en ue b ecau s e A. B. d id n o t sp eci fi cal l y t es t i fy reg ard i n g t h e ad d res s wh ere t h e act s

o ccu rred

. He al s o as s ert s th at al t h o u g h J erry Ph i l li p s , an in v es ti g at o r wi t h t h e Hal l

Co u n ty s h eri ff’ s d ep art m en t

, tes t i fi ed t hat t h e act s o ccu rred at t he v i ct i m ’ s h o m e

l o c a t e d i n Hal l Co u n t y , h i s s t at em en t was h ears ay becau s e h e lack ed p ers o n al

k n o wl ed g e t hat t h e ab u s e o ccu rred at t h is l o cat io n

.

Un l es s v en u e m

u s t b e ch an g ed t o o b tai n an i m p art ial ju ry , a

cri m i n al c a s e m

u st b e t ri ed i n t h e co un t y w h ere th e cri m e w as

co m m i t t ed

. [V] en u e is a ju ri s d i ct i o n al fact t h e St at e m u s t p ro v e bey o n d

a reas on ab l e d o u b t i n ev ery cri m i n al cas e. Th e St at e m ay m eet i t s b u rd en

at t ri al u si n g ei t h er d i rect o r ci rcu m s tan t ial ev i d e n c e , an d th e

6 B l a ke v. S t a t e , 3 0 4 Ga. 7 4 7

, 7 5 0 (2 ) (8 2 2 S E 2 d 2 0 7) (2 0 1 8 ) (ci t at i o n an d

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

7 See Ha r p v. S t a t e , 3 4 7 Ga. Ap p . 6 1 0 , 6 1 4 (2 ) (8 2 0 SE2 d 4 4 9) (2 01 8 ).

4d et erm i nat i o n of wh et h er v en ue h as b een es t ab l is hed i s an i ss u e s o u n d l y

wi t h in t h e p ro v i n ce o f t h e ju ry

. 8

Here, A. B. t es t i fi ed t h at Cwi k t o u ch ed her a t t h e i r ho m e, s p eci fi cal l y i n h er ro o m ,

an d th at s h e li v ed wi t h h er fam i l y at th e t i m e t h e act s o ccu rred

. Ph il l ip s al s o t es t i fi ed

at t ri al t h at fo l lo w in g A. B.’ s d i s cl o s u re of t h e ab us e, t h e Hal l Co u n t y p at ro l d i v i s i o n

m et D FCS at a h ou s e lo cat ed on Ben Park s Ro ad

, wh ich w as t h e s am e s t reet p ro v i d ed

as t h e Cwi k s ’ h o m e ad dres s l o cat ed i n Hal l Co u n t y

. M o reo v er, w h en t h e St at e as k ed

Ph i l l ip s “ b as ed on y o u r in v es t i g at io n , wh ere w as t h e ab u s e al l eg ed t o h av e

h ap pen ed [,] ” Ph i l l i ps res p o n d ed wi t h Cwi k ’ s Hal l Co u n t y ad d res s

. T h ere was al s o n o

ev i d en ce s u g g e s t i n g t hat t h e act s o ccu rred at an o t h er ad dres s

. Th erefo re, b ecau s e

ju ro rs are al l owed “ t o d raw reas o n ab l e i nfe r e n c e s fro m ci rcu m s t an t i al ev i d en ce in

d eci d i n g wh et h er a cri m e was co m m it t ed i n th e co u n t y al l eg ed [,] ” 9 we co n cl u d e t h at

,

b as ed o n t h e ev id en ce p r e s e n t e d

, a reas on ab l e ju ry co u l d h av e fo un d t h at t h e act s

o ccu rred wi t h i n Hal l Co u n t y

.

8 W o r t h en v. St a t e , 3 04 Ga. 8 6 2

, 8 6 5 (3 ) (a) (8 2 3 SE2 d 2 9 1 ) (2 0 1 9 ) (ci t at i on s

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

9 Id . at 8 6 8 (3 ) (c).

5Fu rt herm o re, al t h o u g h Cwi k arg ued t h at Ph i ll i ps ’ s s t at em en t reg ard i n g wh ere

t h e act s o ccu rred was h ears ay , an d t h erefo re i n s uffi ci en t t o es tab l is h v en u e, t h i s

arg u m en t i s u n av ai li n g

. Ev en as s um i n g t h at Ph i l l i ps ’ s s t at em en t was h ears ay , Cwi k

fai l ed t o o b

ject t o i t at tri al

, an d co n s eq u en t ly t he t es t i m o n y b ecam e “ l eg al ev i d en ce

an d ad m i s s i b l e.” 1 0 A cco rd i n g l y , f o r p u r p o s es of d et erm i ni n g v en u e, th e j u ry co u ld

co n si d er t h e s t at em en t i n t h e co nt ex t o f t he o th er ev i d en ce reg ard in g wh ere t h e cri m es

o ccu rred

. 1 1 Th e r e f

o r e , co n s i d eri n g t h e ab ov e, t h e ev i d en ce w as s u ffi ci en t fo r a

rat i o nal t ri er o f fact t o fi n d t h at v en u e was es t ab li s h ed i n Hal l Co u nt y

.

2

. Cwi k al s o arg u es t h at b eca u s e t r i a l co u ns el fai l ed t o o b ject t o Ph i l l i p s ’ s

s t at em en t as h ears ay , hi s p e r f o r m an ce co n s ti t ut ed i n effect i v e as s is t an ce, an d t h e

p reju d i ce fro m

t h i s erro r was s u ffi ci en t t o warran t a n ew t ri al

.

In o rd er t o prev ai l o n a cl ai m o f i n effect iv e as s i s t an ce o f co u ns el

,

a cri m i n al d efen dan t m u s t sh o w t h at co u n s e l ’ s p erfo rm an ce w as

d efi ci en t an d t hat t h e d efi ci en t p erfo rm an ce s o p reju d i ced t h e cl i en t t hat

1 0 OCGA § 24 -8 -8 02 ; s ee Ma s o n v. St a t e , 3 5 3 Ga. A p p

. 4 04

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

7 1 1 ) (2 0 2 0 ).

1 1 See Ma so n , 3 53 Ga. Ap p . at 4 0 8 (3 ).

6t h ere i s a r eas o n ab le l ik el i ho o d t h at

, b ut fo r co u ns el ’ s erro rs , th e

o u t co m e o f t h e t ri al wo u l d h av e b een d i fferen t

. 1 2

Ho wev er, “ [f] ai l u re t o sat i sfy ei t h er p ro ng of t hi s t es t i s fat al t o an effect i v e as s i s t an ce

cl ai m [.] ” 1 3

Here, ev en as s u m i n g th at Ph i l l i p s’ s s t at em en t co n s t i t u t ed h ears ay a n d t ri al

co u ns el ’ s fai lu re t o o b

jec t w as an erro r, Cwi k h as fai led t o es t ab l is h “ a reas o n ab l e

p ro b ab i l i t y t h at

, b u t fo r co u n s el ’ s u n p ro fes s i o n al erro rs , t h e res u l t o f t he pro ceed i n g

wo u l d h av e b een di fferen t .” 1 4 A s n o t ed i n Di v i s io n 1

, s u p ra, t h e St at e m ay m eet i t s

b u rd en us i n g ei t h er di rect o r ci rcu m s t an t i al ev i den ce. 1 5 Co n s i d e ri n g t h e ev i d en ce

p res en t ed reg ard i n g wh ere t h e cri m es o ccu rred

, Cwi k h as n o t dem o ns t rat ed t h at t h ere

was a reas o n ab l e li k el i h o od th at t h e ju ry wo u l d h av e reach ed a d ifferen t co n cl u s i o n

ev en if t ri al co u n s el h ad o b ject ed t o Ph i l l i p s ’ s s t at em en t

. 1 6

1 2 B eck v. S t a t e , 2 8 5 Ga. Ap p. 7 6 4

, 7 6 5 (6 47 SE2 d 4 0 8 ) (2 0 07 ) (ci t at i o n an d

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

1 3 Pi hl ma n v. S t a t e , 2 9 2 Ga. Ap p . 6 1 2 , 6 1 5 (3 ) (a) (6 6 4 SE2 d 9 0 4) (2 0 0 8 ).

1 4 Ja cks o n v. S ta te

, 32 1 G a. Ap p

. 6 0 7, 61 0 (1 ) (7 3 9 SE2 d 8 6 ) (2 0 1 3 ) (ci t at i on s

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

1 5 W o r t h en , 3 0 4 Ga. at 8 6 5 (3 ) (a).

1 6 See Mo ha med

v. S ta t e , 3 0 7 Ga. 8 9

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

7Ad d it i on al l y , Cwi k can no t s h o w th at t ri al co u n s el was d efi ci en t in fai l i n g t o

o b ject t o Ph i l l i p s’ s st at em en t b ecau s e t he s t at em en t i t sel f d i d no t co n s t it u t e h ears ay

.

At t ri al , Ph i l li p s t es ti fi ed t h at , b as ed o n h i s i n v es t i gat i o n , t h e ab u s e h ad o ccu rred at

Cwi k’ s h o m e ad d res s, w h i ch is l o cat ed i n Hal l C o u n t y. A s t h e Su p rem e Co u rt o f

Geo rg i a has s t at ed

, a d et ect i v e’ s “ co m m en t o n t h e res u l t s of h i s i n ves t i g at i o n [i s ] n ot

h ears ay ev i d en ce [ ]” wh ere t h e tes t i m on y “ was l i m i t ed t o t he fi nd i n g s o f t h e

d et ect i v e’ s i n v e s t i g at i o n an d d i d n o t i n cl u d e o r m ak e referen ce t o o u t -o f-co u rt

s t at em en t s m ad e t o h i m [.] ” 1 7 Th e r e fo re, becau s e Ph i l l i p s ’ s l i m i t ed s t at em en t

co n cern ed o n l y t h e res u l t s o f h i s i n v es t i g at i o n , s p eci fi cal l y wh ere t h e ab u s e o ccu rred

,

an d di d n o t i n cl u d e s t at em en t s m ad e b y o t h ers , t h i s s t at em en t s t an d i n g al o n e d i d n ot

co n st i t u t e h ears ay

. 1 8 Th u s , t ri al co u ns el ’ s fai l u re t o o b ject was n o t d efi ci en t

. 1 9

1 7 P o r ter v. St a t e , 2 92 Ga. 2 9 2

, 2 9 3 -2 9 4 (2 ) (7 3 6 SE2 d 4 09 ) (2 0 1 3 ); s ee Jo n es v. S t a t e , 3 2 9 Ga. Ap p . 4 7 8, 4 81 (3 ) (7 6 5 SE2 d 6 5 7) (2 01 4 ).

1 8 See OCGA § 24 -8 -8 01 (c); s ee al s o s ee Jo n es , 3 2 9 Ga. Ap p . at 4 8 1 (3 ).

1 9 See W es l ey v. S t at e , 2 8 6 Ga. 3 5 5

, 3 5 6 (3 ) (a) (6 8 9 SE2 d 2 8 0 ) (2 0 10 ) (“ [T] ri al

co u ns el d i d n o t p erfo rm d efi ci en t l y b y fai l in g t o m ak e a m eri t l es s o bject i o n t o t h e ad m i s s i o n o f t h i s ev i den ce.”).

83

. Cwi k arg u es t h at t h e t ri al co u rt ab us ed i t s d is cret i o n i n n o t decl ari n g a

m i s t ri al b ec a u s e an e-m ai l t o t h e Di s t ri ct At t o rn ey ’ s offi ce w as i n ad v ert en t l y

d i s p l ay ed d u ri ng t h e t ri al

.

“ Th e d eci si o n wh et her an y u n au t h o ri zed s t at em en t, co m m u n i cat ed t o t h e ju ry

ei t h er i n d i v i d u al l y o r as a g ro up , i s s o p reju d i ci al as t o warran t a m i s t ri al i s i n t h e

d i s cret i o n o f t h e t ri al co urt

. ” 2 0 A d d i t i o n al l y , “ a ju ry v erd i ct wi l l n o t be u p s e t s o l el y

b ecau s e o f s u ch [s t at em en t s ]

, u n l es s t h e s t at em en t s are s o p reju d i ci al t h at th e v erd i ct

m u st b e d eem ed i nh eren t l y l ack i n g i n d u e p ro ces s .” 2 1

Here, w h i l e s h o wi n g a v i d eo t o t h e j u ry , an i n t ern al St at e e-m ai l was d i s p l ay ed

b ri efl y o n t h e s creen

. Th e co u rt an d t ri al c o u n s e l n o ted t h at t h ey w ere o n l y ab l e to

read p art o f t h e e-m ai l

, an d wh en t h e ju ro rs were as k ed i f t h ey s aw t h e e-m ai l

, o n l y

t wo i n di v i d u al s (o n e ju ro r an d o n e al t ern at e) rai s ed t h ei r h an d s

.

Th e t wo j u ro rs were s u b s eq u en t l y q u es t i o n ed i n d ep en d en t l y ab o u t wh at t h ey

s aw. Th e fi rs t ju ro r tes t ifi ed

, “ I t h i n k i t s ai d

, Dad d y Cwi k i s tes t ify i n g. I d i d n ’ t s ee t h e

wh o l e t h i n g .” Sh e al s o s tat ed t h at i t was o n l y v i s i b l e “ o n e, t wo s eco n d s m ay b e.”

2 0 Co o ke v. S t a t e , 2 3 0 Ga. Ap p . 3 2 6 , 3 2 7 (4 96 SE2 d 3 3 7) (1 99 8 ).

2 1 S i ms v. S t a t e , 26 6 Ga. 4 1 7

, 4 1 9 (3 ) (4 6 7 SE2 d 57 4 ) (1 9 9 6 ) (ci t at i o n an d

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

9W h en as k ed i f i t wo u l d i m p act h er ab i l i t y “ t o g i v e a t r u e a n d f a i r v erd ict [,] ” s h e

res p o n d ed “ [n ] o s ir, I d on ’ t b el i ev e s o .”

Th e al t ern at e ju ro r t es t i fi ed th at h e was o n l y ab l e t o read p art o f t h e m es s ag e,

s p eci fi cal l y “ [s ] o m et h i n g ab o ut Dad d y Cwi k [a n d ] s o m et h i ng ab o u t t h e Afri can

Am eri can s p y .” He al s o st at ed t h at t he e-m ai l wo u l d no t im pact h i s ab i l it y to ren d er

a t ru e an d fai r v erd i ct

. T h e co u rt s u b s eq u en t l y p ro v i d ed a l i m i t i n g i ns t ru ct i o n

reg ard i n g t h e e-m ai l t o each ju ro r i n d i v i d u al l y

.

Bas ed on t h e reco rd b efo re u s , t h e m es sag e was o nl y d i sp l ay ed b ri efl y , t h e t wo

j u r o r s wh o s aw i t were o n l y ab l e t o read a p o rt i o n of t h e e-m ai l

, an d b o t h j u r o r s

recei v ed l i m i t i n g i n s tru ct i o n s

. Th erefo re, we co n cl ud e t h at t h e b ri ef d i sp l ay o f t h e

m es s ag e was n ot s o preju d ici al as t o ren d er th e v erd i ct i n h e r e n t l y lack i ng i n d u e

p ro ces s , an d acco rd i n gl y , 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 on

.

4

. Cwi k arg u es th e t ri al co u rt ab u s ed i t s d i s cret i o n i n al lo wi n g A. B. to t es t i fy

i n h er Nat i o n al Gu ard u n i fo rm

. He as s ert s th at al l o w in g h er, as t he St at e’ s cen t ral

wi t n es s , t o ap p ear i n m i l i t ary un i fo rm i m p ro p erl y b o l s t ered h er cred i b i li t y b efo re t h e

ju ry

.

10Th i s Co u rt h as h el d t h at “ a t ri al co u rt d o es no t ab us e i ts d i s cret i on i n al l o wi n g

a wi t n es s o n act i v e d u ty i n t h e m i l i tary t o t e s t i f y i n u n ifo rm [.] ” 2 2 Qu o t i n g t h e

Ten nes see Co u rt o f Cri m i n al A p p eal s , t es t i fy i ng in m i l i t ary u ni fo rm “ i s l i t t l e d i fferen t

f r o m a p o l i ce o ffi cer t es t i fy i n g i n a p o l i ce un i fo rm

. . . . [W ] h et her a wi t n es s o r a

v i ct i m i s a co m

m o n l ab o rer, an en g i n eer, o r a d o c t o r , i s a fact wh i ch m ay b e

co n si d ered b y t he j ury b u t i s cl earl y n o t d et erm i n at i v e of t he cred i b i li t y o f t h at

p ers o n .” 2 3

Here, A. B. t es t i fi ed t h at s h e h ad jo i n ed t h e Nat i o n al Gu ard an d co m p l et ed b o ot

cam p an d t h e req u i red t rai n i n g s h o rt l y b efo re t ri al

. Sh e al s o t es t i fi ed t h at s h e wo u ld

b e p art i ci p at i n g i n t h e Res erv e Offi cer Trai ni n g Co l l eg e ( “ R O T C ” ) pr ogr a m wh en s h e

s t art ed co l l eg e, wh i ch s h e tes ti fi e d wo u l d b e ap p ro x i m at el y a week aft er t h e t ri al

.

Fu rt h e r , a s A. B. w as a w i t nes s, h er cred i b i l i t y was s u bject t o cro s s -ex am i n at i o n

. 2 4

Th u s, t h e p res en t s it u at i o n i s d ifferen t fro m t h e “ m u ch -l i t i g at ed q u es ti o n o f a

2 2 Ca r ver v. S t a t e , 3 2 4 Ga. Ap p . 4 2 2 , 4 2 5 (7 50 SE2 d 7 3 5 ) (2 0 1 3).

2 3 Id . at 42 4 (ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

2 4 Cf. Ha r p , 3 4 7 G a. Ap p. at 6 1 4 (2 ) (h o l d i ng t h e t ri al co urt d i d n o t ab u s e i t s d i s cret i o n i n refu s i ng t o al l o w t h e d efen d an t t o wear h is m i l i t ary u n i fo rm wh ere, i n t er al i a, h e d i d n o t t es t i fy

an d was n o t s u b

ject t o cro s s -ex am i n at i on ).

11d efen d an t ’ s co u rt ro o m at t i re[,] ” 2 5 as d efen dan t s , u n l i k e wi tn es s es , m ay b e p res en t

wi t h o u t t ak i n g t h e s tan d

. M o reo v er, t h e co u rt p ro v i d ed a li m i ti n g in s t ru ct i o n c harg i n g

t h e j u ry n o t t o co n s id er h er u n i fo rm b efo re s he tes t ifi ed

. 2 6 Th erefo re, al l o wi n g A. B.

t o t es t ify i n h er u ni fo rm d i d n o t u n d u ly preju d ice Cwi k

, an d acco rd i n g ly

, t h e t ri al

co u rt d i d n o t ab u s e i t s d is cret i o n

. 2 7

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

Br o wn

, J., co n cu r

.

2 5 Ca r ver

, 3 2 4 Ga. Ap p . at 4 2 5

.

2 6 See i d . at 4 2 6

.

2 7 See i d

.

12