FOURTH D I VI SI ON

DOYLE, P. J.

, COOM ER and M A R KLE, 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

June 14, 2019



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 9 A0 45 4 . RUTLEDGE v

. THE STATE.

C O O M E R , J u d ge.

Greg o ry Ru t led g e, Jr. was i nd i ct ed o n o n e co u n t o f ag g rav at ed s t al k i n g aft er

h e was accu s ed o f s en d i n g h a ras s in g t ex t m es s ag es t o h is ex -wi fe in v i o l at i o n o f a

t em p o rary res t rai n i n g o r d e r. Fo l l o wi n g a ju ry t ri al at w h i ch h e el ect ed t o rep res en t

h i m s el f, Ru t l ed g e was co n v i ct ed an d s en t en ced t h e s am e d ay

. Ru t l ed g e fi l ed a m o t i o n

fo r n ew tri al

, as am en d ed

, al l eg i n g t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n al l o wi n g h i m t o p ro ceed p ro

s e wi t h o u t fi rs t es t ab l i s h i n g t h at h e m ad e a k no wi ng

, in t el l i gen t

, an d vo l u n t ary wai v er

o f h i s r i g h t t o co u n sel

. Aft er co n d u ct i n g a h eari n g o n t h e m o t i o n

, t h e t ri al co u r t

d en ied Ru t l ed g e’ s req u es t fo r a n ew t ri al

. 1 On ap p eal

, Ru tl ed g e ag ai n arg u es t h at h e

1 Ru t l ed ge al so fi l ed a m o t i o n t o m o d i fy h i s s en t en ce wh ich was arg u ed d u ri n g

t h e heari n g fo r h i s m o t io n fo r n ew t ri al an d l at er d en i ed by t h e tri al co urt

. H o wev er,

Ru t led g e d i d n o t ap p eal t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d en i al o f t h at m o t i o n

.i s en ti t l ed t o a n ew tri al b ecau s e t h e t ri al co u rt fai l ed t o m ak e a fi n d i n g i n t h e reco rd

t h at Ru t l ed g e’ s wai v er o f h i s ri g h t t o co u n sel was k n o wi n g l y an d v o l un t ari l y m ad e.

Becau s e th e t o t al i t y o f t h e reco rd d em o n s t rat es t h at Ru t l ed g e’ s d eci s i on t o wai v e h i s

ri gh t t o co un s el was k no wi n g , i n t el l i g en t , an d v ol un t ary , we d i s ag ree an d affi rm

.

It i s wel l es t ab li s h ed t h at “ b o t h t h e fed eral an d s t at e co n s t i t u t io n s g u aran tee a

cri m i n al defen d an t t h e ri g h t t o sel f-rep res en t at io n

. To b e v al i d

, a d efen d an t ’ s wai v er

o f h i s ri g h t t o b e rep res en t ed b y co u n s el m u s t b e k no wi n g l y an d i n t el l ig en t l y m ad e.”

S t a t e v. Eva n s

, 2 8 5 Ga. 67

, 6 8 (6 73 SE2 d 2 4 3 ) (2 0 09 ) (ci t at i o ns an d pu n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed ). To es t ab l i s h wai ver, o u r Su prem e Co u rt h as h el d t hat “ [t ] h e reco rd n e e d

o n l y refl ect t hat th e accu s ed was m ad e aware o f t h e d an g ers o f s el f-rep res en t at i o n an d

n ev ert h el es s m ad e a k n o wi ng an d i n t el l i gen t w ai v er.” Jo n e s v

. S t a te

, 27 2 Ga. 8 8 4,

8 8 6 (2 ) (5 3 6 SE2 d 5 1 1 ) (2 0 0 0 ) (ci t at i o n s an d pu n ct uat i o n o m i t ted ). “ Th e t ri al ju d g e

i s n o t req u i red t o u s e an y p art icu l ar l an g u ag e i n m ak in g t h e d efen d an t aware o f h i s

ri gh t t o co u n s el an d t he d an gers o f s el f-rep res en t at i o n.” Ma r t i n -Ar g a w v. S t a t e

, 3 4 3

Ga. A p p. 8 6 4

, 8 67 (2 ) (8 0 6 SE2 d 2 4 7 ) (2 01 7 ) (ci t at i o n s o m i t ted ). Ho wev er, “ wh en

a d efen dan t ch al l en ges an al l eg ed wai v er on ap p eal

, i t i s t h e St at e’ s b u rd en t o p ro v e

t h at t h e d efen dan t recei v ed s u ffi ci en t i nfo rm at i o n an d g u i dan ce fro m t h e tri al co u rt

u p o n w h ich t o k no wi n g l y an d i n t el l i g en t l y rel i nq u i s h t h i s ri g h t.” Ha mi l t on v. S t a t e

,

22 3 3 Ga. Ap p

. 4 63

, 4 6 7 (1 ) (b ) (5 0 4 SE2 d 23 6 ) (1 9 9 8) (ci t at i o n s o m i t t ed ). “ Th i s

ev i d en ce m

u st o v erco m e t h e p res u m pt i on ag ai n s t wai ver.” Id

. (ci t at i o n s o m i t t ed ).

“ Th e t ri al co u rt ’ s ru l i n g as to wh et her t he d efen d an t ’ s wai v er o f t h e ri g ht t o co u n s el

was v al i d i s rev iewed fo r ab u s e o f d i s cret i o n .” Co x v. S ta t e , 3 1 7 Ga. Ap p . 6 5 4 , 6 5 4

(7 3 2 SE2 d 3 2 1 ) (2 0 1 2 ) (fo o t n o t e o m i t t ed ).

W i t h th es e g u i d i n g p ri n ci p l es i n m i n d

, t he reco rd s h o ws t hat R u t l e d g e was

ch arg ed wi t h on e co u n t o f ag g rav at ed s t al k i n g aft er sen d i ng t ex t m es s ag es t o h i s

fo r m e r wi fe i n v i o l at i o n o f a t em p o rary res t rai n i n g o rd er th at p ro h ib i t ed h i m fro m

h av in g an y d i rect o r i n d irect co n t act wi t h her. A t h i s arrai gn m en t h eari n g

, Ru t l ed g e

was ap p o i n t ed co u ns el

, en t ered a p lea o f no t g u i l ty

, an d w a s p r e s en t ed wi t h a co py

o f th e i n d i ct m en t

, a l i s t o f t h e St at e’ s wi t n es s es

, an d a pl ea o ffer l et t er. Ru tl ed g e l at er

ap p eared wi t h h is ap p o i n t ed co u n sel

, W i l li am Rh o d es

, fo r a s tat u s h eari n g wh ere h e

was ad v i s ed o f t h e n at u re o f th e ch arg e ag ai ns t h i m an d t h e ra n g e o f al l o wab l e

p u n i s h m en t fo r t h e ch arg e. On t h e m o rn i n g o f tri al

, Ru t led g e ap p eared wi t h Rh o d es

t o arg u e pre-t ri al m o t i o n s

. A ft er t h e t ri al co urt d en i ed Ru t led g e’ s p re-t ri al m o t i o n s

,

Ru t led g e, t h ro u g h co u ns el

, an n o u n ced t h at h e w an t ed t o p ro ceed wi t h a ju ry t ri al

. Th e

co u rt reces s ed an d Ru t l ed g e was t ak en b ack t o a h o l d in g area wh ere h e sp o k e w i th

Rh o d es an d i n d i cat ed t h at he w an ted t o rep res en t h im s el f. Fo l l o wi n g a co n feren ce

3b et ween t h e t ri al co u rt an d Rh od es

, Ru t l ed g e t ol d t h e tri al co u rt th at h e an d Rh o d es

were “ o n a d i fferen t p ag e” wi th res p ect to cert ai n ev i den ce an d h ow i t wo u l d b e u s ed

d u ri n g t h e t ri al

. Th e t ri al co u rt t hen t o l d Ru t l ed g e t h at Rh o d es is “ an ex p eri en ced t ri al

a t t o rn ey ” an d “ h as a co m p reh en s i v e u n d ers tan d i n g o f

. . . t he l aw.” Ru t l ed g e

res p o n d ed t h at “ t h ere s eem s t o b e u n s u ret y [s ic] as far a s

, yo u k n ow, u s m o v i n g

fo rward

, t h e cas e as far as a p l ea as o p p o s e d t o a j u ry t ri al .” Th e t ri al co u rt t h en

rem i n d ed Ru t l ed g e t hat t h ere are t i m es wh en at t o rn ey s t el l t h ei r cl i en t s t h i n g s t h at t h e

cl i en t d oes n o t wan t t o h ear, b u t t hat i f Ru t l ed g e w a n t e d a t ri al

, Rh o des wo u ld

p ro v id e t h e b es t d efen s e p o s s i bl e. Th e t ri al co urt as ked Ru t l ed g e wh at h e wan t ed t h e

co u rt to d o

. Rh o d es t h en s t at ed o n t h e reco rd t h at h e ex p l ai n ed t o Ru t l ed g e h e h ad t h e

o p t i o n t o co n t i n u e t h e tri al

, as k fo r n ew ap p o i n ted co u n s el

, o r rep res en t h i m s el f wi th

Rh o d es as s t an d by co u n s el

. Th e fo l l o w in g ex ch an g e occu rred b et ween Ru t l ed g e an d

t h e t ri al co urt :

RUTLEDGE: I wi s h t o p ro ceed p ro s e an d wi t h s tan d b y co u n s el

.

TRIAL COUR T : Yo u are s eri o u sl y g o i n g t o em bark o n a ju ry t ri al

rep res en t i n g y o urs el f?

RUTLEDGE: It ’ s m

y cas e, Yo u r Ho n or.

4TRIAL COURT: Th at was n ’ t m y q u es ti o n

.

RUTLEDGE: Yes , s i r.

TRIAL COURT: So t he an s wer i s y es

.

RUTLEDGE: Yes , s i r.

TRIAL COURT: Are y ou p rep ared t o d o t h at n o w?

RUTLEDGE: Yes , s i r.

TRIAL COURT: Yo u are en t i t l ed to d o t hat i f y o u wan t to d o t h at

, Mr.

Ru t l ed g e, b u t I ju s t feel ab s o l u t el y o b l i g at ed t o t el l y ou at t h i s t i m e wh at

a h o rri b l e d eci s io n I t h in k t h at i s. Yo u are w an t i n g to go [s i c ] t r i a l

rep res en t i n g y o urs el f w i t h M r. Rh o des as s t an d b y co u n sel

. Is t h at m y

u n d ers t an di n g ?

RUTLEDGE: Yes , s i r.

TRIAL CO U R T : O k a y

. M r. Rh o d es

, y o u are g o i n g t o b e s t an d b y

co u n s el

, an d t h at wi ll m ean t h at y o u’ l l s i t i n th e ro w b eh i n d Mr.

Ru t l ed g e, an d M r. Ru t l ed g e wi ll as k an y q u es ti o n s h e h as o f y o u du ri n g

t h e t ri al o f t h i s cas e.

5Aft er t h i s ex ch an g e, Rh o d es l eft h i s t ri al prep arat i o n m at eri al s

, s uch as wi t n es s

q u es ti o n o u t l i nes

, v o i r d i re q u es t i o n s

, an d req ues t s t o ch a r g e wi t h Ru t l ed g e at t h e

d e f e n s e t ab l e. Th e co u rt ret u rn ed fro m a s h o rt reces s an d t h e fo l l o wi n g ex ch an g e

o ccu rred b et w een Ru t l ed g e an d Rh o d es :

RHODES: Th i s is an o t h er co p y o f t h e i n d i ct m en t

. Pl eas e l o o k h ere. T h i s

h as n o t ch an g ed

. Th e 1 8 th d ay o f J u ly t h ey are s t i l l al leg i n g

, y o u k n ow,

t h e cri m e o f ag g rav at ed s t al k i n g h ere i n Gwi n net t Co u nt y

. Ok ay

. Th at

i s wh at y o u are ch arg ed wi t h. Do y ou u n d ers t an d ?

RUTLEDGE: Yes , s i r.

Fro m t h at p o i n t t o t h e en d o f t ri al

, Ru t l ed ge act i v e l y t r i e d h i s cas e wi t h t h e

as s i s tan ce o f s t a n d b y co u n sel

. Ru t l ed g e fu l l y en g ag ed i n v o i r d i re an d q u es t i o n ed

ju ro rs wi t h s p eci f

i c f o l l o w u p q u es t i o n s

. On ce th e ju ry was s el ect ed an d t h e ju ro rs

were ex cu s ed fro m t he co u rt ro o m

, t h e t ri al co u rt ex pl ai n ed t h e p ro ced ure t h e co u rt

wo u l d u s e t h ro u gh o u t t h e tri al o f t h e cas e an d g av e cau t io n ary i n st ru ct io n s reg ard i n g

Ru t led g e’ s ri g h t s as a d efen d an t an d t h e St at e’ s b u rd en o f p ro o f. T h e t ri al co urt as k ed

Ru t led g e i f h e u n d ers t o o d wh at h ad b een ex p lai n e d t o h i m an d i f h e h ad an y

q u es ti o n s

, t o wh i ch R

u t l e d g e res p o nd ed t hat h e u n d ers t o od an d d i d n o t h av e an y

q u es ti o n s

. W hen t h e t ri al res u m ed t h e fo l l o wi n g d ay

, Ru t l ed g e m a d e p re-t ri al

6m o ti o n s, o b jec t e d d u ri n g t h e St at e’ s o p en i n g s t at em en t

, an d g av e h i s o p en i n g

s t at em en t t o t h e ju ry ou t l i n in g hi s t h eo ry o f th e cas e. Du ri n g th e t ri al

, Ru t l ed g e m ad e

arg u m en t s ag ai n s t t h e u s e o f cert ai n p ri o r act s ev id en ce b y t h e St at e, ch al l en g ed t h e

s u f f i c i en cy o f t h e i n d ict m en t

, an d s u cces s fu l ly arg u ed fo r t h e ad m i s s io n o f o t h er

ev i d en ce. Ru tl ed g e cro s s-ex am i n ed al l o f t he St at e’ s w i t nes s es i n cl u d i ng a n e xte nsi v e

cro s s -ex am i n at i o n o f t h e v i ct i m , h is fo rm er wi fe.

At t h e cl o s e of t h e St at e’ s cas e, Ru t l ed g e m ad e a m o t i o n fo r acq u it t al arg u i n g

t h e St at e’ s ev id en ce fai led t o s h o w a p at t ern s u ffi ci en t t o su p p o rt th e ch arg e o f

ag g rav at ed s t al k i n g

. At t h e en d o f t h e t ri al

, Ru t l ed g e m ad e h i s cl o s i n g arg u m en t s in

wh i ch h e rei t erat ed h i s o v erarch i n g t h em e o f t h e cas e, w h i l e h i gh l ig h t i n g fo r t h e ju ry

cert ai n d efi ci en ci es i n t h e St at e’ s cas e ag ai n s t hi m

. Rh o d es

, as s t an d b y co u n s el

, m et

wi t h Ru tl ed g e at t h e jai l aft er t h e fi rs t d ay of t ri al t o g o o ver an y q u es t i o n s Ru t l ed g e

m ay h av e h ad i n p rep arat i o n fo r t h e n ex t d ay

, an d t hro u g h o u t t h e t r i a l

, R h o d es

ro u t i nel y co u n s el ed Ru t l ed ge d u ri n g b reak s

. A j u ry fo u nd Ru t led g e gu i l t y o f

ag g rav at ed s tal k i n g an d he w as s en t en ced t o s erv e a t o t al o f t en y ears wi t h ni n e y ears

i n co n fi n em en t

.

In h i s s o l e en u m erat io n

, Ru t l ed g e arg u es t h at th e t ri al co u rt ’ s fai l u re t o co n d u ct

a h eari n g t o es tab l i s h o n t h e reco rd t h at h e m ad e a k n owi n g, i nt el l i g en t, an d v o l u n t ary

7wai v er o f h i s ri g h t to co u n s el i s rev ers ib l e erro r. W hi l e we ag ree t h at t h e t ri al co u rt

c o u l d h av e i n q u i red fu rt h er t o en s ure Ru t led g e’ s d eci s i o n t o rep res en t h i m s el f w a s

k n o wi n g an d v o lu n t ary

, t h e reco rd cl earl y d em o n s t rat es a v al i d wai ver b y Ru t l ed ge.

a. As an in it i al m at t er, we d i s ag ree wi t h Ru t l ed ge’ s co n t en t i on t h at t h e t ri al

co u rt fai l ed t o m ak e a fi nd i n g on t h e reco rd t h at h e m ad e a k n o wi n g an d v o l u n t ary

wai v er o f h i s ri g h t to co un s el

. In i t s o rd er d en y i n g t h e m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al

, t h e t ri al

co u rt ex p res s l y fo u n d t h at “ t h e t o t al i ty of t h e reco rd d em on s t rat es t h at [Ru t l ed g e]

m ad e t h i s d eci si o n freel y

, v ol u n t ari ly

, an d i n t el l i g en t l y .” Th i s Co u rt h as hel d t h at “ a

t ri al co u rt ’ s d et erm i n at io n o f a k n o w i ng an d v o l u nt ary wai v er w i th i n an o rd er

d en y i n g a m o ti o n fo r n ew t r i a l q u al i fi es as a fi n d i n g o n t h e reco rd .” McDa n i el v.

S t a t e

, 3 2 7 Ga. A p p. 6 7 3

, 6 7 5 (a) (7 6 1 SE2 d 8 2 ) (2 0 1 4 ) (ci t at i on o m i t t ed ). M o reo v er,

t h e d et erm i n at io n b y t h e t ri al co u rt as t o wh et h er a defen d an t h as m ad e an i n t el l i g en t

wai v er o f h i s ri g h t t o co u n sel “ d ep en d s o n t h e p ecu l iar fact s a n d c i r cu m s t an ces o f

each cas e

. . . [an d ] o u r Su p rem e Co u rt h as ex p res s l y d i s ap p ro v ed t h e read i n g o f

d eci s i o n s o f t h i s co u rt

. . . t o req u i re a t ri al co urt t o m ak e s p eci fi c i n q u i ri es o f a

d efen d an t .” Ma rt i n -A r

g a w

, 3 4 3 Ga. Ap p

. at 8 67 (2 ) (ci t at i o ns an d pu n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed ).

8W h i l e art i cu l at ed fi n di ng s o n t h e reco rd b y a tri al co u rt are p referab le, “ i t i s n ot

req u i red wh en t h e reco rd as a w h o l e d em o ns t rat es a defen d an t ’ s k n o w i n g wai v er.”

Ma r t i n -Ar

g a w

, 3 4 3 Ga. Ap p

. at 8 7 0 (2 ) (ci t at i on o m i t t ed ). Th u s

, t h i s Co u rt m u s t fi rs t

c o n s i d er wh et h er th e St at e m et i t s b u rd en o f d em o n s t rat in g t h at t h e part i cu l ar f a c t s

an d ci rcu m s t an ces of t h i s cas e s h o w t h at Ru tl ed g e was m ad e aware o f t he d an g ers o f

rep res en t i n g hi m s el f an d no n et h el es s k n owi n g l y an d v o lu n t ari l y wai v ed h i s ri g h t to

co u ns el

. S

ee Co x , 3 1 7 Ga. Ap p

. at 6 5 5 (“ Th e s t at e h as t h e b urd en o f d em on s t rat i n g

t h at t h e d efen dan t recei v ed s u ffi ci en t i nfo rm at i o n an d g u i dan ce fro m t h e t ri al co u rt

t o m ak e a k no wi ng an d i n t el li gen t wai v er o f t h e ri g h t to co u n s el .” (fo o t n o t e o m i t t ed )).

In t h e p res en t cas e, t h e reco rd refl ect s t h at Ru t l ed g e was ad vi s ed of th e n at u re

o f t h e ch arg e ag ai n s t h i m d u ri n g h i s arrai g n m en t wh en t h e St at e p res en t ed h i m wi th

a co p y o f t h e i n d i ct m en t

. A t a sep arat e s t at u s h eari n g

, Ru t led g e was fu rt her ad v i s ed

b y t h e tri al co urt o f t h e n at u re o f t h e c h a r g e a g a i n s t h i m as wel l as t h e m ax i m u m

s en t en ce h e co u ld recei v e i f fo u n d g u il t y o f t h e ch arg e. On t h e m o rn i n g of t ri al , t h e

t ri al co u rt co u n s el ed Ru t l ed g e t h at Rh o d es h ad co m p reh en si v e kn o wl ed g e ab o u t t h e

l eg al i ss u es i n v o l v ed wi th t h e cas e an d rem i n d ed h i m t hat wh i l e h e m ay n ot al way s

a g r e e wi t h h i s at t orn ey

, Rh o d es wo u l d p ro v i d e h i m wi t h t he b es t d efen s e p o s s i b l e.

Th e t ri al co u rt en gag ed i n a s h ort co l l o qu y wi t h Ru t l ed g e an d ex p res s ed i t s o p i n i o n

9t h at Ru t l ed g e was m ak i n g a “ h o rri b l e d eci s i o n” t o rep res en t h i m s el f, b ut u l t i m at el y

g ran t ed Ru t led ge’ s req u es t

. Aft er v o i r d i re, t h e t ri al co u rt en g ag ed i n a s eco n d

co l l o q u y wi t h Ru t l ed g e wh ere t h e t ri al co urt fu rt h er ex p l ai n ed t h e pro ced u re o f t h e

co u rt an d Ru t l ed g e’ s co n s t i t u ti o n al ri g h t s w i th res p ect t o t es t i fy in g an d t h e b u rd en o f

p r o o f

. D e s p i t e t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s warn in g s

, Ru t l ed g e ch o s e t o ex erci s e h i s ri g h t t o

rep res en t h i m s el f.

W e n o t e t h at al th o u g h t h e t ri al co u rt ex p res s ed co n cern t o Ru t led g e t h at h e was

m ak i n g a “ h o rri bl e deci s io n ” b y el ect i n g t o r e p r e s en t hi m s el f, m erel y ap p ri s i n g a

d efen d an t th at s el f-rep res en t at i o n i s g en eral l y a bad d eci s i o n i s n o t s u ffi ci en t t o s h o w

t h at a d efen d an t was m ad e aware o f th e d an gers o f s el f-rep res en t at i o n

. See Ma n n i n g

v. S ta t e

, 2 6 0 Ga. Ap p

. 1 7 1

, 1 7 2 (5 8 1 S E 2 d 2 9 0 ) (2 0 0 3 ) (wai v er n o t k n o wi n g an d

v o l u n t ary wh ere d efen d an t was aware h e was faci n g co n s i d erab l e p ri s on ti m e b u t t ri al

co u rt si m

p l y warn ed h i m th at h e l ack ed s u ffi ci en t l eg al kn o wl ed g e an d t h at

rep res en t i n g hi m s el f was an “ u n wi se d eci s i o n ” an d “ e x t r em el y i l l -ad v is ed ”). Ev en

wi t h i ts ex p l an at i on o f t ri al p ro ced u re, t h e t ri al co urt s h o u l d h av e q ueri ed fu rt h er to

en s u re t h at Ru t l ed g e was aware o f t h e d an g ers an d d i s ad v an t ag es o f rep res en t i n g

h i m s el f b ey o n d ex p res s i n g i n g en eral t erm s i t s di s ap pro v al o f Ru t l ed g e’ s d eci s i o n.

S ee La ma r v. S t a t e

, 2 7 8 G a. 1 5 0

, 1 5 2 (1 ) (b ) (5 9 8 SE2 d 4 8 8) (2 0 0 4 ) (rev ers i b l e erro r

10wh ere t ri al co u rt d i d n o t t ry t o m ak e d efen d an t aware o f t h e d an gers an d

d i s ad v an t ag es h e faced p ro ceed i n g p ro s e at tri al d ue t o h i s i gn o ra n c e o f b as i c

cri m i n al l aw co n cep t s b u t i n s t ead q u eri ed t h e defen d an t o n h is t ech n i cal l eg al

k n o wl ed g e).

Ho wev er, n o t wi t h s t an d i n g an y p ercei v ed s can t in es s in the tr i a l c ourt ’ s warn i n g

t o Ru t l ed g e, b as ed o n a r e v i e w o f t he reco rd as a wh o l e, Ru t l ed g e w as m ad e fu l l y

aware of t h e d an g ers o f s el f-rep res en t at i o n

. At t h e h eari n g on Ru t l ed g e’ s m o t i o n fo r

n e w t r i al

, Rh o d es t es t i fi ed t h at h e m ad e Ru t l ed g e fu ll y aware of t h e nat u re o f t h e

ch arg e, t he p o s s i b l e s en t en ces

, p o t en t i al defen s es

, p l ea o ffers

, an d t h e d an g ers o f

s el f-rep res en t at i on

. S

ee Jo n es v. S t a te

, 2 72 Ga. 88 4

, 8 8 6 (2 ) (5 36 SE2 d 51 1 ) (2 0 0 0 )

( d e f en d an t k n o wi n g l y an d i n t el l i g en t l y wai v ed ri g h t t o co u n s el wh e r e public de f e nde r

t es t i fi ed t h at s he i n fo rm ed d efen d an t o f t he ch arg e, p o s s i b l e sen t en ces

, an d d an g ers

o f s el f-rep res en t at i o n); S i mp s o n v. S t at e

, 2 3 8 Ga. Ap p

. 1 09

, 1 1 2 (1 ) (5 1 7 SE2 d 8 3 0 )

( 1 9 9 9 ) (k n o wi n g w ai ver w h ere t ri al co u rt ad vi s ed d efen d an t th at i t wo u l d b e

“ ex t rao rd i n ari l y u n wi s e” t o rep res en t h i m s el f an d wh ere ap p o i nt ed co u n s el i n fo rm ed

d efen d an t o f t he d an g ers o f s el f-rep res en t at i o n). “ Th u s, th e t ri al t ran s cri p t cl earl y

i n d i cat es t h at d efen d an t w as n o t d e n i e d t h e ri gh t t o co u n s el b y th e t ri al co u rt

, b ut

i n s t ead k no wi n g l y

, u nd ers t an d i n g l y an d v o l u n t ari ly el ect ed to rep res en t hi m s el f

. . .

11. Un d er t he ci rcu m s t an ces o f t h i s p art i cu l ar cas e, we fi n d n o erro r req u i ri n g a rev ers al

o f t h e co n v i ct i o n .” Ru tl ed g e v. S t a t e

, 2 2 4 Ga. Ap p

. 6 6 6

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

(1 9 9 7) (ci t at i o n o m i t t ed ).

b

. As s u m in g

, a r

g u en d o

, t h a t t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n al lo wi n g Ru t l ed g e to

rep res en t h i m s el f, an y p ercei v ed erro r was h arm l es s b ey o nd a reas o n ab l e d o u b t

. “ To

es t ab l i s h h arm l es s erro r, t h e St at e h as t h e b u rd en o f s h o wi n g be yo n d a reas o n ab l e

d o u b t t h at t h e erro r d i d n o t co n t ri b u t e t o t h e v erd i ct

. ” Mi d d l e t o n v

. S t a t e

, 2 5 4 Ga.

Ap p

. 64 8

, 6 5 0 (2 ) (5 6 3 SE2 d 54 3 ) (2 00 2 ) (fo o t n ot e o m i t t ed ). An d th i s Co u rt h as h el d

t h at “ s u ch erro r was n o t harm les s wh ere t h e reco rd s ho wed t h at t h e d efen d an t d i d n ot

m o un t an ab l e d efen s e— ev en t h o u g h t h e ev i d en ce o f g u i l t was am pl e.” Id

. at 6 5 0 -6 5 1

(2 ) (ci t at i o n s an d em

ph as i s om it t ed ). A rev i ew of t he en t i re reco rd dem o ns t rat es t h at

Ru t led g e was prep ared t o try h i s cas e an d m o un t ed an ab l e defen s e of h i s cas e. 2 Th e

t ri al co u rt fo u n d t h at Ru t l ed g e p erfo rm ed t h e “ y eo m an ’ s w ork i n rep res en t in g h i m s el f

o n t ri al ” fro m v o i r d i re t o cl o s i n g arg u m en t, an d di d s o in a co g en t an d ab l e m an n er

t h ro u g h ou t

. At t h e h eari n g o n t h e m o t i on fo r n ew t ri al

, Rh o d es t es t i fi ed t h at

2 W e ag ree w i t h Ru t l ed g e t h at hav i n g Rh o d es as s tan d b y co u n s el i s n ot

s u ffi ci en t f

o r t h e S t a t e t o s at i s fy i t s b u rd en o f p ro v in g h arm l es s erro r b ey o nd a

reas on ab l e d o u b t reg ard les s o f wh et h er, as t h e t ri al co u rt co ncl u d ed

, Rh o d es “ act ed

as m o re t h an a s t an d b y co u n s el

, ro u t i n el y co un s el in g wi t h [Ru t l ed g e] d u ri n g b reak s .”

S ee McDa ni el , 3 2 7 Ga. Ap p . at 6 8 0

.

12Ru t led g e’ s q u es t i o n i n g o f wi t n es s es was g o o d, th at R ut l ed g e is “ an i n t el l i g en t

p ers o n ,” an d t h a t o v eral l Ru t led g e d i d a g o od jo b d efen d i n g h i s cas e u n d er t h e

ci rcu m s t an ces

. Th e reco rd al s o s h o ws t h at Ru t l ed g e’ s ex am i n at i o n of wi t n es s es

,

o b ject i on s

, an d arg um en t s fo r cert ai n m ot i o n s refl ect ed n o t o nl y h i s c l ear

u n d ers t an d i n g o f t he ch arg es ag ai n st h i m

, but a l so de m onst rat ed h i s d efen s e st rat eg i es

an d t h eo ri es o f t h e cas e.

Ho wev er, d es p i t e h i s b es t effo rt s

, t h e ev i d en ce ag ai n s t Ru t l ed g e was

u n c o m p l icat ed an d s i m

p l y ov erwh el m i n g

. Ru t l ed ge was ch arg ed wi t h s en d i n g

h aras s i n g a n d i n ti m id at i n g t ex t m es s ag es to h i s fo rm er wi fe in vi o l at i o n o f t h e

t em p o rary r e s tr a i n i n g o rd er. Do cu m en t ary ev i d en ce s u ch as th e t em p o rary res t rai n i n g

o rd er, d i v o rce decree, paren t i n g p l an

, an d t h e s u b j ect t ex t m es sag es were ad m i t t ed at

t ri al as wel l as t es t i m o n y fro m R u t l e d g e’ s fo rm er wi fe d es cri bi ng h er rel at i o n s h ip

wi t h Ru t l ed g e an d th e co n t ex t o f t he m es s ag es s h e recei v ed fro m h i m

. Po ss i b l y t h e

m o st d am

n i n g o f al l t h e e v i d en ce p res en t ed t o t he ju ry was a v i d eo o f Ru t l ed g e

co n fro n ti n g h i s fo rm er wi fe i n t he p ark i ng lo t o f t h ei r ch i l d ’ s day care. Th u s, “ v i ewi n g

t h e ev i d en ce as a wh o l e, an d i n l i g h t o f t h e o v erwh el m i n g ev id en ce o f [Ru t l ed g e’ s ]

g u i l t

, i t i s un l i k el y t h at d efen d an t ’ s co n v i ct i o n s were at t ri b u tab l e t o h i s de c i s i o n to

13rep res en t h i m s el f.” Revi er e v. S t a t e

, 2 3 1 Ga. Ap p

. 3 2 9

, 3 31 (1 ) (4 9 8 SE2 d 3 3 2 )

(1 9 9 8) (ci t at i o n o m i t t ed ).

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

Ma r kl e, J., co ncu r

.

14