FI RST DI VI SI ON

BA RNES, P. J.

, GOBEI L and M A RKLE, 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 14, 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 27 2 . CANALES v . THE STATE.

G O B E I L

, J u d g e.

Fo l l owi n g a ju ry

t ri al , Es t u ard o Can al es was co nv i ct ed i n t h e Su p eri o r Co u rt

o f Gwi nn et t Co u n t y o f rap e, i n ces t

, an d s tat u t o ry rap e. Can al es n o w ap p eal s fro m t h e

d en ial o f h i s m o ti o n fo r n ew t ri al

, as s ert i n g t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n s en t en ci n g h i m

t o l i fe wi t h o u t paro l e o n t h e rap e co n v i ct i o n

, as h e was n o t el i g ib l e fo r t h at sen t en ce.

As ex p l ai n ed m o re fu l ly b el o w, we ag ree w i t h Can al es ab o u t h i s s en t en ce, al t h o u g h

n o t fo r t he reas on s he arg u es

. Acco rd i n g l y

, we vacat e Can al es ’ s s en t en ce o n h i s rap e

co n vi ct i o n an d rem an d fo r en t ry o f a n ew s en ten ce.

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

, t h e d efen d an t i s n o l on g er en t i t l ed t o

a p res u m p t i o n o f i n n o cen ce an d we t h erefo re co n s t ru e t h e ev i d en ce i n t h e l i g h t m o s t

fav o rab l e t o t h e j ury ’ s g ui l t y v erd i ct .” Ma d d o x v. S t a t e

, 3 4 6 Ga. A p p

. 6 7 4, 6 7 5 (8 1 6SE2 d 7 9 6 ) ( 2 0 1 8 ) ( c i t at io n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed ). So v iewed

, t h e reco rd s h o ws

t h at i n Sep t em

b er 2 0 1 5

, Can al es ’ s t h en 1 7 -y ear-o l d s t ep d au g h ter rev e a l e d t o h er

ch u rch p as to r t h at Can al es h ad b een s ex u al l y m o l es ti n g h e r f o r a n u m b er o f y ears

.

W i t h t h e s u p p o rt o f t he p as t o r an d o t h er ch u rch l ead ers

, t h e v i ct i m t hen t o l d h er

m o th er ab o u t t h e ab us e. Th e v i ct i m fu rt her rev eal ed th at Can al es was t h e fat h er o f h er

s o n , wh o was b o rn wh en t h e v i ct i m was fo u rt een y ears o l d.

Fo l l owi n g th e v i ct i m ’ s o u t cry

, th e fam i l y co n t act ed l aw en fo rcem en t an d aft er

an in v es t i g at i o n

, Can al es was i n d i ct ed o n t wo c o u n t s o f rap e, t wo co un t s o f i n ces t

,

an d a s i n g l e co u n t o f s t at u t o ry rap e. 1 W i t h res p ect to t h e rap e ch arg es

, th e i n d i ct m en t

al l eg ed t h at o n e rap e o ccu rred o n No v em b er 1 , 2 0 1 0

, an d t h at t h e s eco n d rap e t o o k

p l ace o n J u n e 2 5 , 2 0 1 5

.

At t ri al

, t h e v i ct i m t es t i fi ed t h at s h e was bo rn o n Sep t em b er 1 9, 1 9 9 7

, an d t h at

Can al es h ad b een s ex u al l y ab u si n g h er s in ce s h e was n i n e o r t en y ears o ld

. Th e fi rs t

i n ci d en t of m o l es t at i o n o ccu rred i n ei t h er 2 00 7 o r 2 0 0 8

, o n a d ay wh e n t h e v i ct i m

arri v ed h o m e fro m s ch o o l wh i l e h er m o t h er was at wo rk

. Th e l as t i n ci d en t occu rred

i n J u ne 2 0 1 5

, a few m o n t h s b efo re t h e v i ct i m m ad e h er o u t cry

. T h o s e t wo i n ci d en t s

,

1 Can al es al s o was ch arg ed wi t h o n e co u n t o f ch il d m o l es t at i o n

. At t ri al

, t h e

St at e el ect ed to n o l l e p ro s t h at ch arg e, an d t h a t co u n t of t he i n d i ct m en t was n ot

s u b m i t t ed t o t h e ju ry

.

2l i ke al l o f t h e o t her in ci d en t s o f m o l es t at i o n

, i nv o lv ed Can al es h av i n g v ag i n al

i n t erco u rs e wi t h th e v i ct im

. An d al t h o ug h t h e v i ct i m co u l d n ot reca l l t h e ex act

n u m b er of t i m es Can al es h ad s ex wi t h h er, s h e k n ew t h at th e ab u se o ccu rred o n m o re

t h an t en occas i o n s. Fi n al l y

, t h e v i ct i m s tat ed t h at Can al es i m p reg n at ed h er wh en s h e

was 1 4, an d s h e g av e b i rt h t o t h ei r s o n o n Au g u st 1 1 , 2 0 1 2

. 2

Du ri n g t h e ch arg e co n feren ce, t h e p art i es d i s cu s sed t h e ap p l i cab l e s t at u t es o f

l i m i tat i on fo r t h e ch arg ed cri m es

. Fo l l o wi n g t h at d i s cu s s i o n, t h e p art i es ag reed t h at

,

al t h o u g h t h e s t at u t e of l i m i t at i o n fo r rap e w a s fi ft een y ears

, t he t ri al co u rt s h o u ld

i n s t ru ct t h e ju ry th at t he St at e h ad t o p ro v e th at t h e cri m es were i n d i ct ed wi t h i n s ev en

y ears o f ei t h er th e v i ct im ’ s o ut cry t o l aw en fo rcem en t o r th e vi ct i m ’ s s i x t e en th

b i rt h day

. 3 Ad d it i o n al ly

, at t h e St at e’ s req u es t, t h e co urt ag reed t o i n s t ru ct t h e ju ry t h at

2 DNA ev i d en ce p res en t ed at t ri al s h o w e d a 99 .9 9 9 9 p ercen t l i k el i h o o d t h at

Can al es had fat h ered t h e v i ct i m ’ s s o n

.

3 See OCGA § 1 7 -3 -1 (b ) (t h e st at u te o f li m i t at i o n fo r rap e i s 1 5 y ears ); OCGA

§ 1 7 -3 -1 (c) (s u b

ject t o OCGA § 1 7 -3 -2 .1

, t h e s t at u t e o f li m i t at i o n i s s ev en y ears fo r

fel o n i es co m

m i t ted ag ai ns t a v ict i m wh o was un d er t he ag e o f ei g h teen at th e t i m e o f

t h e offen s e) ; O C G A § 17 -3 -2 .1 (fo r t h e cri m es o f rap e, i n ces t, an d s t at u t o ry rap e

i n v o l v i n g a v i ct i m u n d er th e ag e o f 1 6

, t h e s t at ut e of l i m i t at i o n is to l l ed “ u n t i l t h e

v i ct i m h as reach ed t he ag e o f 1 6 o r t h e v i ol at i o n i s rep o rt ed t o a l aw en fo rcem en t

ag en cy . . .”).

3t h e d at es o f t h e al l eg ed cri m es as s et fo rt h i n t h e i n d i ct m en t were n o t m at eri al

el em en t s o f t h os e cri m es . Th ereaft er, t h e co u rt ch arg ed t h e ju ry as fo l l o ws :

Th e St at e i s no t req ui red t o p ro v e t h at t h e o ffen s es al leg ed h ap p en ed o n

t h e d at e al l eg ed i n t h e i n d i ct m en t

. It i s s u ff i c i e n t f o r th e St at e to s h o w

t h at ei t h er t h e al leg ed v i ct i m ’ s 1 6 th b i rt h d ay o r t h e al l eg ed vi ct i m ’ s

d i s cl o s u re to t h e l aw en fo rcem en t o ccu rred wi t h i n t h e s ev en y ears p ri o r

t o t h e ret u rn o f t h e i n d i ct m en t

. Th e i n d i ct m en t was ret u rn ed o n Feb ru ary

8 , 2 0 1 7

.

Th e ju ry fo u n d Can al es g u i l t y o n al l co un t s s u b m it t ed t o i t

, an d

, aft er m erg i n g

t h e t wo co u n t s o f rap e an d t h e two co u nt s o f i nces t

, t h e t ri al co u rt en t ered ju d g m en t

o n t h e ju ry ’ s v erd i ct

. Th e t ri al co u rt s en ten ced Can al es t o li fe wi th ou t p aro le 4 o n t h e

rap e co n v i ct i o n

, 3 0 y ears ’ i m p ri s o n m en t o n t h e i n ces t co n vi ct i o n

, an d 20 y ears ’

i m p ri s o n m en t o n t h e co nv i ct i o n fo r s tat u t o ry rap e, wi t h al l s en ten ces t o b e s erv ed

co n secu ti v el y

. Can al es d id n o t o b ject t o th e s en t en ce as i m p o s ed

. Can al es fi l e d a

m o ti o n fo r n ew tri al

, an d

, fo l l owi n g a h eari n g

, t h e t ri al co u rt den i ed t h at m o t i o n

. Th i s

ap p eal fo l l o w ed

.

4 At s en t en ci ng , u p o n q u es t i on i n g b y t he t ri al co u rt

, t he St at e i n d i cat ed t h at a

s en t en ce o f li fe wi t h ou t t he po s s i b i l i t y o f p aro l e was an o pt i o n w i t h res p ect t o t h e

rap e ch arg e.

4In a s i n g l e en u m erat i o n o f erro r, Can al es arg u es t h a t t h e tri al co u rt erred in

s en t en ci n g h i m t o l ife wi t h o u t paro l e o n h i s rap e co n v i ct i o n

. Rel y i n g o n t h e Geo rg i a

Su p rem e Co u rt ’ s deci s io n i n S t at e v. Vel a z qu ez

, 2 8 3 Ga. 2 0 6 (6 5 7 SE2 d 8 3 8) (2 0 0 8 ),

Can al es co n ten d s t h at a d efen d an t co n v i ct ed o f a rap e t h at o ccu rred p ri or t o t h e 2 0 0 9

rep eal o f OCGA § 1 7 -1 0 -3 2 .1 5 m ay n o t be s en t en ced t o l i fe wi t h o u t p aro l e u n l es s t h e

St at e p r o v i d e d p ret ri al no t i ce t h at i t i n t en d ed to s eek t h e d eat h p en al t y o n t h e rap e

ch arg e. Can al es fu rt h er co nt en d s t h at

, t ak en t o g ethe r

, t he vict i m ’ s t ri al t es t i m o n y (t h at

t h e fi rs t rap e o ccu rred pri o r t o 2 0 0 9 ) an d t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s ju ry i n s t ru ct i on s (t h at d at es

were n o t a m at eri al el em en t o f th e ch arg ed cri m es ) p erm i t t ed t h e ju ry to co n v i ct h i m

o f a rap e t h at o ccu rred p ri o r t o t h e rep eal o f O CGA § 1 7 -1 0 -3 2 .1

. 6 Can al es t h erefo re

5 Th e Gen eral As s em

b l y rep eal ed S e ct i o n 1 7-1 0 -3 2 .1 d u ri n g th e 2 0 0 9

l eg i s lat i v e s es s i o n

, an d t h at rep eal b ecam e effect i v e Ap ri l 2 9

, 2 0 0 9

. See Ga. Laws

2 0 0 9 , Vo l . 1 , p . 2 27 , § 7 ; p .2 28

.

6 In i t s o rd er d en y i n g Can al es ’ s n ew t ri al m o t i on

, t h e t ri al co u rt s t at ed t h at “ t h e

ju ry fo u n d [Can al es ] gu i l t y o n l y o f cri m es t h at o ccu rred aft er 2 0 1 0” b ecau s e “ t h e ju ry

was s p eci fi cal l y i n s t ru ct ed t h at t h e St at e

. . . was req u ired t o p ro ve t h at t h e o ffen s es

o ccu rred wi t h in t h e s ev en y ears p reced i ng t h e ret urn o f t h e i n d ict m en t

. ” A n d b ecau s e

t h e i n d i c t m e n t was ret u rn ed o n Feb ru ary 8

, 2 0 1 7

, t h e co u rt co n cl u d ed t h at Can al es

“ was u l t i m at el y fo u n d g u il t y o f o ffen s es t h at o ccu rred at t h e earl i es t o n Feb ru ary 8,

2 0 1 0 .” W i t h res p ect t o an y rel ev an t t i m e p eri o d s

, h o wev er, t he reco rd s h ows t h at t h e

ju ry was i n s tru ct ed t h at t h e St at e h ad t o p ro v e t h at “ ei t h er t h e al l eg ed v i ct im ’ s 1 6 th

b i rt h day o r t h e al leg ed v i ct i m ’ s d i s cl o s u re t o t h e l aw en fo rcem en t o ccu rred s ev en

y ears p ri or t o th e ret u r n o f th e i n d i ct m en t

. ” Th u s, as t he St at e co n ced es i n i t s b ri ef,

n o t h i n g i n th e ju ry in st ru ct i on s p rev en t ed t he ju ry fro m co n v i ct i n g Can al es o f a rap e

5reas on s t hat th e t ri al co u rt h ad t o s en t en ce h i m fo r rap e p u rs u an t t o OCGA § 1 7 -1 0

-

3 2 .1

, an d b ecau s e t h e St at e fai l ed t o p ro v i d e h i m s u ch pret ri al n o t i ce, h i s l i fe s en t en ce

wi t h o u t t h e p o ss i b i l i t y o f p aro le i s v oi d

. See Ewel l v. S t a t e

, 3 1 8 Ga. Ap p

. 8 1 2

, 8 1 6

-

8 1 7 (2 ) (a) (7 34 SE2 d 7 9 2 ) (2 0 12 ) (a d efen d an t m u s t b e sen t en ced u n d er t h e rel ev an t

s t at u to ry s ch em e i n p lace at t he t i m e h e co m m i t t ed t h e cri m e at i s s u e); Fo r d e v. S t a t e

,

2 8 9 Ga. Ap p

. 80 5

, 8 0 9-8 1 0 (6 5 8 SE2 d 41 0 ) (2 0 08 ) (wh ere t es t i m o n y s h o wed

d efen d an t en g a g e d i n s e x u al b at t ery o f t h e m i n o r v i ct i m b ot h b efo re an d aft er t h e

am en d m en t o f t h e rel ev an t s tat u t e, an d t he ju ry ret urn ed a g en eral verd i ct

, th e m o re

l en i en t s en t en ci n g s ch em e fro m t h e earl i er v ers i o n o f t he s t at u t e m u st ap p l y ).

W h i l e we u l t i m at el y ag ree t h at res en t en ci n g i s req u ired

, we d i s ag ree wi th

Can al es ’ s reas o ni n g

. Sp eci fi cal l y

, h e fai l s t o co n s id er ei t h er t h e p l a i n l an g u ag e o f

OCGA § 1 7 -1 0 -3 2 .1 o r t h e co n t ex t i n wh i ch Vel a z q u ez ap p l i ed t h at s t at u te. Fo rm er

Co d e s ect i o n 1 7 -1 0 -3 2 .1 p ro vi d ed :

(a) Su b ject t o t he p ro v i s i o n s o f s u bs ect i o n (b ) o f t h i s Co d e s ect io n

, an y

p ers on wh o h as been in d i ct ed fo r an o ffen s e fo r w h i ch t h e deat h pen al t y

o r l i fe wi t h o u t p aro l e m ay b e i m p o s ed ma y en t er a p lea o

f g u i l t y a t a ny

o ccu r r i n g p ri o r t o 2 0 0 9. See Hea t h v. S ta t e

, 26 9 Ga. A p p

. 8 7 2

, 8 7 2 (1 ) (6 0 5 SE2 d

4 2 7 ) (2 0 0 4 ) (“ W h ere t he dat e al l eg ed i n t h e i n d i ct m en t i s n o t a m at eri al el em en t o f

t h e o ffen s e, th e St at e m ay p ro v e t h e offen s e a s o f an y d at e wi t h i n t h e st at u t e o f

l i m i tat i on .”) (ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t ted ).

6t i m e a f ter i n d i ct men t

, an d t h e ju d g e of t h e s u p eri o r co u rt h av i n g

j u r i s d i c t i on m ay

, in t h e ju d g e’ s d i s cret i o n

, s en t en ce t h e pers o n to li fe

i m p ri s o n m en t o r t o an y o t h er p u n is h m en t au th o ri zed b y l a w f o r t h e

o ffen s e n am ed i n t h e i n d i ct m en t

.

(b ) Un l es s th e d i s t ri ct at t o rn ey h as g i v en n o ti ce t h at th e s t at e i n t en ds t o

s eek t he d eat h p en al t y p u rs u an t t o t h e Un i fo rm Ru l es o f th e Su p eri o r

Co u rt s , t h e ju d g e s h al l s en t en ce t h e d efen dan t t o l ife i m p ri s o nm en t . In

cas es wh ere s u ch n o t i ce h as b een g i v en

, t h e ju d g e m ay s en t en ce th e

d efen d an t to deat h or l ife wi t h o u t p aro le on l y i f t h e j u d ge fi n d s bey o n d

a reas o n ab l e d o u bt t h e ex i s t en ce of at l eas t o n e s t a t u t o r y ag grav at i n g

ci rcu m s t an ce as p ro v id ed i n Co d e Sect i o n 1 7 -1 0-3 0

.

OCGA § 1 7 -1 0 -3 2 .1 (2 00 8 ) (em p h as i s s u p p l i ed ).

As t h e ab o v e-em

p has i zed l an g u ag e d em o n s t rat es

, OCGA § 17 -1 0 -3 2 .1 ap p li es

o n l y in t h o s e p re-2 0 0 9 cas es w h ere t h e d efen d an t h as en t ered a g ui l ty p l ea. See Pa r ks

v. St a t e

, 3 0 5 G a. 7 1 2

, 7 1 4 (2 ) (8 2 7 SE2 d 6 6 9 ) (2 0 1 9 ) (t h e rep eal o f OCGA § 1 7 -1 0

-

3 2 .1 “ rem o v [ed ] t h e s en t en ci ng d u t i es o f a ju d g e r eg a rd i n g a per s o n wh o pl ed g u i l t

y

t o an o ffen s e fo r wh i ch t h e d eat h p en al t y or l ife wi t h o u t p aro l e co u l d b e i m p o s ed ”)

(ci t at i o n an d p un ct u at i o n o m i tt ed ; em p h as i s s u p p li ed ); Vel az q uez

, 2 83 Ga. at 2 0 7 (“ in

t h e s peci f i c ci rcu ms t a n ces o

f a g u i l ty p l ea i n a ca s e f a l l i n g u n der OCGA § 1 7 -1 0

-

3 2 .1

, a n o t i ce o f i nt en t t o s eek t h e d eat h p en al ty i s a s t a t u t o r y p rereq u i s i t e t o a

7s en t en ce o f l i fe wi t h o u t t he po s si b i l i t y o f p aro l e”) (em ph as i s s u p p l ied ). Acco rd i n g l y

,

b ecau s e Can al es was co n v i ct ed fo l l o w i n g a t r i a l (v ers u s a g u i l ty pl ea), t h is s t at u t e

d o es no t ap p l y

h ere. 7

Al t h ou g h Can al es can no t p rev ai l o n h i s arg u m en t u n d er OCGA § 1 7 -1 0 -3 2 .1

,

we n ev ert h el es s fi n d th at t he tri al co u rt erred i n s en t en ci n g h i m t o l i fe wi t h ou t p aro l e.

In Vel a zq u ez

, o u r Su p rem e Co u rt ex p res sl y reject ed t h e i d ea t h at

, as a b ri g h t -l i n e ru l e,

“ a s en t en ce o f l i fe wi t h o u t paro l e i s au t ho ri zed o n l y i n cas es in wh ich t h e St at e fi rs t

s o u g ht t h e d eat h p en al t y

. ” 8 Vel a z q u ez

, 2 8 3 Ga. at 2 0 7 (ci tat i o n an d pu n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed ). Rat h er, t h e Co u rt em p h as i zed t h at wh et h er a s p ec i f i c s e n t en ce can b e

i m p o s ed i n a p art i cu l ar cas e i s co n t ro l l ed b y t h e ap p l icab l e “ s tat u t o ry s ch em e creat ed

b y t h e G en eral As s em

b ly .” Id

. See al s o Ki mb r o u g h v. S t a t e

, 3 0 0 Ga. 5 1 6, 5 2 0 (3 )

7 F or m e r O C G A § 17 -1 0 -3 1 .1

, wh i ch was rep eal ed s i m u l t an e ously w i th S e c tion

1 7 -1 0-3 2.1

, ad d res s ed s en t en ci n g a d efen d an t to l ife wi t h o u t p aro l e fo l l o wi n g a ju ry

t ri al

, an d p ro v i d ed th at s u ch a p en al t y co u l d n o t be i m p o s ed u n l es s t h e ju ry fo u n d “ at

l eas t o ne s t at u t o ry ag g rav at i n g ci rcu m s t an ce” an d reco m m en d ed “ t hat s u ch s en t en ce

b e i m p o sed .” O C G A § 1 7 -1 0 -3 1 .1 (2 0 0 8). Un li k e Sect i o n 1 7 -1 0 -3 2

. 1

, h o wev er,

Sect i o n 1 7 -1 0 -3 1

. 1 d id no t ap p ly t o cas es i n v o lv i n g an y “ o ffen s e fo r wh i ch th e d eat h

p en al t y or l i fe wi th o u t p aro l e m ay b e i m p o s ed .” In s t ead

, t h at co d e s ect i o n ap p l i ed

o n l y t o cas es wh ere t h e defen d an t was ch arg ed wi t h an d t ri ed fo r m u rd er. OCGA §

1 7 -1 0-3 1.1

.

8 T h ere i s n o i n d i cat i o n i n t h e reco rd t hat t h e St at e fi l ed a n o t i ce of i n t en t to

s eek t h e d eat h p en al t y

o n t h e rap e ch arg e ag ai n s t Can al es

.

8(7 9 6 SE2 d 6 94 ) (2 0 1 7 ). A n d a pro v i s i on i n t h e rel ev an t s tat u t o ry s en t en ci n g s ch em e

t h at ex i s t ed pri o r to A p ri l 20 0 9

, OCGA § 1 7 -1 0 -3 0 .1

, s u pp o rt s Can al es ’ s cl ai m t h at

t h e t ri al co u rt i n t h i s cas e was n o t au t h o ri zed t o im p o s e a s en t en ce o f l ife wi t h o ut

p aro l e o n h i s rap e co n v i ct io n

.

Tu rn i n g t o th e s t at u t o ry s ch em e i n ex i s t en ce p ri or to 2 0 0 9

, th e t ex t o f OCGA

§ 1 6 -6 -1 (b ) ap p eared t o p erm i t a s en t en ce o f l ife im p ri so n m en t wi t h o u t p aro l e fo r a

rap e co n vi ct io n :

A p ers o n co n v i ct ed o f th e o ffen s e o f rap e sh al l b e p u n i s h ed by d eat h

, [ 9 ]

b y i m p ri s on m en t fo r l i fe wi t h o u t p aro l e, b y i m pri s o n m en t fo r l i fe, or b y

i m p ri s o n m en t fo r n ot l es s th an 2 5 y ears an d n o t ex ceed i n g l i fe

i m p ri s o n m en t

, fo l l owed b y pro b at i o n fo r l i fe. An y p ers o n co n v i ct ed

u n d e r t h i s Co d e s ect i o n s h al l

, i n ad d i t i o n

, b e s u bject t o t he s en t en ci n g

an d p u n i s h m en t p ro v i s io n s o f Co d e Sect i o n s 1 7-1 0 -6 .1 [Pu n i s hm en t fo r

s eri o u s v i o l en t o ffen d ers ] an d 17 -1 0 -7 [Pu n i sh m en t o f rep eat o ffen d ers ;

p u n i s h m en t an d el ig i b i l i t y fo r p aro l e o f p e r s on s co nv i ct ed o f fo u rt h

fel o n y o ffen s e]

.

OCGA § 1 6 -6 -1 (b ) (2 0 0 8). An d i n OCGA § 1 7 -1 0 -1 6 (a), t h e C o d e s ect i o n

au t h o ri zi n g sen t en ces fo r i m pri s o nm en t fo r li fe wi t h o u t paro l e (wh i ch was i n effect

9 In Geo rg ia, a d eat h s en t en ce c a n n o t b e i m p os ed fo r a rap e co n v i ct i o n.

Ken ned y v. Lo u is i a n a

, 5 5 4 U. S. 4 0 7

, 4 1 9 -4 2 1 (II) (1 28 S C t 2 6 4 1

, 1 7 1 LE2 d 5 2 5 )

(2 0 0 8); Co ker v. Geo r

g i a

, 4 3 3 U. S. 5 8 4

, 5 9 2-5 9 7 (III) (9 7 SCt 2 8 61

, 5 3 LE2 d 9 8 2 )

(1 9 7 7).

9p ri o r t o 2 0 0 9 a n d r e m a i n s in effect n ow), t h e Gen eral As s em b l y pro v i d ed t h at

“ [n ] o twi th s t a n d i n g an y o t h er p ro v is i o n o f l aw, a p ers o n wh o i s co nv i ct ed o f an

o ffen s e co m

m i t t ed aft er M a y 1

, 1 9 9 3

, fo r wh i ch t h e d eat h p en al t y m ay b e i m

p o s ed

u n d er th e l aws o f th i s s t at e m ay b e s en t en ced t o d eat h

, i m p ri so n m en t fo r l i fe wi t h o ut

p aro l e, o r l i fe i m

p ri s on m en t as p ro vi d ed i n Art i cl e 2 o f t h is ch ap t er.” In t u rn

, Art i cl e

2 of Ch ap t er 1 0 o f Ti t l e 1 7 o f o u r Co d e, en t i t l ed “ Deat h Pen al t y Gen eral l y ,”

c o n t ai ned O CGA § 1 7-1 0 -3 0

. 1

, wh i ch g o v ern ed t h e i m p o s i t i o n of s en t en ces o f

i m p ri s o n m en t fo r l i fe wi th o u t p aro l e p ri o r t o i t s rep eal effect i v e A p ri l 2 9

, 2 0 0 9

. 1 0 As

rel ev an t h ere, fo rm er OCGA § 1 7 -1 0 -3 0 .1 p ro vi d ed :

(b ) I n a l l cas es fo r wh i ch l i fe wi t h o u t paro l e m ay be au t h o ri zed

, th e

j u d g e s h a l l co n s i d

er

, o r s h a l l i n c l u d e i n th e j u d ge’ s in s t ru ct i o n s t o th e

ju ry fo r i t t o co n s i d er, an y m i ti g at i n g ci r c u m s t an ces o r an y o f th e

s t at u t o ry a ggr a va ting c ir c um sta nc e s s p eci fi ed b y Co d e Sect i o n 1 7-1 0 -3 0

wh i ch m ay b e s u p p o rt ed b y t he ev i d en ce.

(c) Th e s tat u t o ry i n s t ru ct i o n s as d et e r m i ned b y t h e tri al ju d g e to be

warran t ed b y t h e ev i d en ce s h al l b e g i v en i n ch arg e an d i n wri t i n g t o th e

ju ry fo r i ts d el i b erat i o n. Th e ju ry , i f i t s v erd i ct i s a reco m m en d at i o n o f

l i fe wi t h o u t p aro l e, sh al l d es i g n at e i n wri t i n g

, s ig n ed b y t h e fo rem an o f

t h e ju ry

, t he s t at u t o ry ag g rav at i n g ci rcu m s t an ce o r ci rcu m s t an ces wh ich

1 0 See Ga. Laws 2 0 0 9 , Vo l

. I, p . 2 2 6 , § 4 ; p . 2 2 8

.

10i t fo u n d b ey o n d a reas o n ab l e d o u b t

. In n o n ju ry cas es t h e ju d g e sh al l

m ak e su ch d es i g n at i o n

. U n l es s at l eas t o ne o f t h e s t at u t o ry ag grav at i n g

ci rcu m s t an ces en u m erat ed in Co d e Sect i o n 17 -1 0 -3 0 i s s o f o u n d

, l i fe

wi t h ou t p aro l e s hal l n o t b e i m p o s ed

.

OCGA § 1 7 -1 0 -3 0 .1 (2 0 0 8 ) (em p h as i s s u p p l i ed ).

Th e reco rd h ere s h o ws t h at t h e t ri al co u rt m ad e n o fi nd i n g at s en t en ci n g o f an y

o f t h e ag grav at i n g ci rcu m s t an ces s et fo rt h i n t h e v e r s i o n o f OCGA § 1 7 -1 0 -3 0 t h at

ex i s t ed p ri or t o 2 00 9

. Becau s e a p o ss i b i l i t y e x i s t ed t h at t h e ju ry co n v ict ed Can al es

o f a rap e t h at o ccu rred p ri o r t o 2 0 0 9, an d g i v en t h e pl ai n l an g uag e of f o r m e r Co d e

Sect i o n 1 7 -1 0 -3 0 .1

, w e fi n d t h at t h e t ri al co urt was w it ho u t au t h o ri t y t o s en t en ce

Can al es t o l i fe wi t h o ut paro l e o n t h e ch arg e o f rap e. Acco rd i n g l y

, as Can al es was n ot

o t h erwi s e el i g ib l e fo r a l i fe s en t en ce wi t h ou t th e p o s s i b i l i t y o f p aro l e o n h i s rap e

co n vi ct i o n

, w e m

u s t v acat e t h i s p o rt i o n o f t h e s en t en ce an d rem an d t he cas e t o t h e

t ri al co u rt fo r res en t en ci n g

. See Ma r s h a l l v. S t at e

, 3 09 Ga. 6 9 8

, 7 02 ( 3 ) ( 8 4 8 SE2 d

3 8 9 ) (2 0 2 0 ) (“ t h e s en t en ci n g co u rt h as ju ri s di ct i o n t o v acat e a v o id s en t en ce at an y

t i m e, an d t h e fai l u re t o o b ject at t ri al d o es n o t wai ve s u ch a cl ai m ”); Ba xt er v. S t a t e

,

3 2 9 Ga. Ap p. 5 8 9

, 5 9 0 (2 ) (7 6 5 SE2 d 7 3 8 ) (2 0 1 4 ) (co n cl u di n g t h at d efen d an t ’ s

s en t en ce o f l i fe wi th o u t t h e p os s i b i l it y o f p aro le fo r rap e co nv i ct i o n fo r c o n d u ct

o ccu rri n g p ri o r t o 2 0 0 9 was i l l eg al , an d v acat i n g an d rem an di n g fo r res en t en ci n g ).

11Ju d

g men t va ca t ed an d ca s e r ema n d ed f o r r es en t en c i n g. Ba r n es

, P. J., a n d

Ma r kl e, J., co n cu r

.

12