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

Febr uar y 5, 2020



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 9 A2 45 5 . HAM BRICK v . THE STATE.

M A R K LE

, J ud g e.

Fo l l owi n g a ju ry t ri al

, Jas o n Ham b ri ck was co n v i ct ed o f rap e (OCGA § 1 6 -6

-

1 ); two co un t s of ag g rav at ed ch i ld m o l es t at i on (OCGA § 1 6 -6 -4 ); in ces t (OCGA

§ 1 6 -6 -2 2 ) (2 0 10 ); an d cru el t y t o ch i l d ren (OCGA § 16 -5 -7 0 ). He n ow ap p eal s fro m

t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d en i al o f h i s m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al

, arg u i n g t h at (1 ) t h e St at e v i o l at ed

t h e d i s co v ery ru les wh en it fai l ed t o t u rn o v er an ad di t io n al m ed i cal rep o rt fro m i t s

ex p ert

, an d t h e t ri al co u rt erred in fai l i n g t o g ran t a co nt i n u an ce i n l i g h t o f t h e

d i s co v ery v i o l at i o n ; (2 ) 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 d ue t o (a) t h e

fai l u re to s eek a co n t i n u an ce o r p ro p erl y i n v es ti g at e th e m ed i cal ev id en ce, an d (b ) t h e

fai l u re t o o b

ject t o hears ay tes ti m o n y co n cern i n g an o t her d o ct o r’ s ex am i n at i o n ; (3 )

t h e t r i a l co u rt erred in l i m i t i n g t h e t es t i m o ny o f h i s ex p ert ; (4 ) t h e t ri al co u r ti m

p ro p erl y al l o wed h ears ay ev i d en ce ab ou t a D N A t es t; (5 ) t h e St at e fai l ed t o p ro v e

v en ue wi t h reg ard t o t h ree o f t h e ch arg es ; (6 ) t h e tri al co u rt erred i n refu si n g t o m erg e

t h e rap e an d cru el t y t o ch i l d ren co nv i ct i o n s; an d (7 ) t he t ri al co u rt ’ s wri t t en s en t en ce

co n fl i ct ed wi t h t h e o ral s en t en ce i m p o sed

. 1 Aft er a t h o ro u gh rev i ew o f t h e reco rd

, an d

f o r t h e reas o n s t h at fo l l o w, we affi rm th e d en ial o f t h e m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al

, b u t

rem an d t h e cas e fo r co rrect i o n o f a s cri v en er’ s erro r i n t h e s en t en ci n g s h eet

.

Vi ewi n g th e ev i d en ce i n t h e l i gh t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e ju ry ’ s verd i ct

, Ja cks o n

v. Vi r g i n i a

, 4 4 3 U. S. 3 0 7 (9 9 SCt 2 7 8 1, 61 LE2 d 5 6 0 ) (1 9 7 9 ), th e reco rd sh o ws t h at

wh en D. H. was t w o y ears o l d

, s h e w a s l i v i ng wi t h her m o t her an d h er s tep -fat h er,

Ham b ri ck

. Th ey

l iv ed i n an ap a r t m e n t in V i n e Ci t y fo r ab o u t a y ear b efo re m o v i n g

i n wi t h D. H .’ s g ran dfat h er an d h i s wi fe in Al p h aret t a. W hi l e t hey l iv ed wi t h t h e

g ran d fat h er, th e m o t h e r wo rk ed an d Ham b ri ck t o ok care o f D

. H. Du ri n g t h i s t i m e,

1 Th e t ri al co u rt i n i t ial l y s en t en ced Ham b ri ck t o a t o t al o f 2 2 0 y ears ’

i m p ri s o n m en t

, wi t h n o t erm o f p ro b at io n

. A l t ho u g h t he t ri al co u rt d en i ed t h e m o t i on s

fo r n ew t ri al o n t h e m eri t s

, i t res en t en ced H am bri ck t o i m

p o se a s pl i t s en ten ce o n t h e

rap e, ag g rav at ed ch i l d m o les t at i o n

, an d i n ces t co un t s

, as req u i red u nd er OCGA § 1 7

-

1 0 -6

. 2. Th e rev i s ed s e n t e n ce, i m p o s ed o n J an u ary 2 5

, 2 0 19

, was 2 1 9 y ears ’

i m p ri s o n m en t wi t h l i fe o n p ro b at i o n

. T h e wri tt en ju d g m en t i n di cat ed th at Ham b ri ck

was s en t en ced t o co n s ecu ti v e t erm s o f 5 0 y ears ’ i m p ri s o n m en t on each co u n t o f rap e

an d ag g rav at ed ch i ld m o l es t at i o n

, an d an o t h er co ns ecu t i v e t erm o f 5 0 y ears t o s erv e

4 9 o n t h e i n ces t co nv i ct i o n

.

2D. H. o ft en co m pl ai n ed of p ai n an d wo u l d cry wh en h av i n g a b o wel m o v em en t

, an d

t h e fam i l y

t h o u gh t t h at D. H. was co n s t i p at ed

.

Acco rd i ng t o D. H., t h e ab u s e s t art ed wh en t h e fam i l y l i ved i n Vi n e Ci t y

, b ut

i t co nt i nu ed aft er th ey m o v ed i n t o t h e g ran d fat h er’ s h ou s e in Al p h aret t a. Sh e s ai d t h at

wh i le s h e was l i vi n g i n V i n e Ci t y

, h er “ d ad d y p u t h i s p en i s i n [h er] b u t t ” m o re t h an

o n e t im e, an d s h e was afrai d t o t el l an y o n e. Sh e al so s ai d t h at i t hap p en ed m o re t h an

o n e t i m e wh i l e s h e was l i v i n g wi t h h er g ran d fat her i n Al p h aret t a. D. H. fu rt h er s t at ed

Ham b ri ck p l aced h i s p en i s i n h er v ag i n a an d h e r m o u t h m ore t h an o ne t i m e, t h at i t

h u rt , an d t h at s h e wo u l d cry

.

On e week en d aro u n d t h e en d o f J u l y 20 1 1

, D. H

. was p l ay i n g at h er g reat

g ran d p aren t s h o u s e wh en her g reat -g ran d m o t h er n o t i ced h er h u m p in g a p i l l o w. Th e

g reat -g ran d m o th er to l d h er to st o p

, an d D

. H. s ai d t h at ’ s “ t he way m y d ad d y d o wh en

h e p u t s h i s p en i s i n m

y b u t t .” Th e g reat -g ran dm o t h er as k ed h er wh at s h e was t al k i n g

ab o ut

, an d D. H. rep eat ed t h at Ham b ri ck wo u l d p lace h i s p en is i n h er b u t t

. D. H.

rep eat ed t h e di scl os u re t o h er g reat -g ran d fat h er an d h er g ran dm o t h er, an d al s o s t at ed

t h at Ham b ri ck wo u l d c o v e r h er m o u t h wi t h t ap e wh en s h e cri ed

. 2 Th e fo l l o wi n g

2 A lat e r search o f Ham b ri ck ’ s h o m e un co v ered bl ack el ect ri cal -t y p e t ap e

co n si s t en t wi t h t h e t y

p e D. H. al l eg ed Ham

b ri ck u s ed t o co v er h er m o u t h

.

3m o rn i n g, D. H.’ s g reat -g ran d p aren t s t o ok h er t o t h e h o s p i t al

. D uri n g an ex am i n at i o n,

D. H. i n fo rm ed t h e d o ct o rs t h at Ham b ri ck p l aced h is p en i s i n h er v ag i n a as wel l

. 3

Bas ed o n t h es e al l eg at io ns

, H am b ri ck was i n d i ct ed fo r rap e, t w o co un t s of ag g rav at ed

ch i l d m o les t at i o n , i n ces t , an d cru el t y t o ch il dren

.

At t ri al

, Dr. Zi eg l er, t h e at t en d i n g p h y s i ci an w h o fi r s t e x am in ed D. H. at t h e

h o s p it al

, t es t i fi ed th at h e o bs erv ed s o m e d i s co l orat i o n an d red n es s al o n g th e l ab i a t h at

i n d i cat ed p o s s i b l e b ru i s in g

. Th ere was al so s o m e d i s co l o rat i o n o f t h e h y m en

, wh i ch

co u ld h av e i n d i cat ed a t ear t h at h ad h eal ed

. He fu rt h er n o t ed so m e d i s co l o rat i o n an d

d i s ru p t i o n al o n g t h e an u s

, fo r ex am pl e t h e sk i n was n o t i n t act

, wh i ch h e ex p l ai n ed

co u ld b e co n s i s ten t wi th so m et h i n g p en et rat i n g t h e an us

. Z i e g l e r o pi n ed t h at t h es e

fi nd i ng s were co n s i s ten t wi t h t h e al l eg at io ns o f m o l es t at i o n an d ab us e. He n o t ed

,

h o wev er, t h at t h e g en i t al area heal s v ery q u i ck l y

, w h i ch co ul d ex p l ai n wh y t h ere were

n o o t h er in d i cat i o ns o r ab n o rm al fi n d i ng s

. N ev ert h el es s

, he co nfi rm ed t h at h e d i d n ot

3 Th e g reat -g ran d m o t h er al s o t es t ifi ed th a t

, a b o u t el ev en m on t h s b efo re t h i s

i n ci d en t

, s h e n o t i ced D. H. p l ay i n g wi t h a d o l l

, t ak i n g h er fi n g ers an d p ret en d i n g to

s p read t h e d o l l ’s v ag i n a. Sh e ex p l ai n ed th at D

. H. wo u l d cry w h en h er g reat

g ran d p aren t s b ro u gh t h er h om e o r w h en Ham b ri ck wo u ld co m e t o t h e g reat

g ran d p aren t s ’ s h o u s e t o pi ck her u p

. D

. H.’ s g ran dm o th er t es ti f i e d t h at sh e o nce

o b s erv ed D. H. p l ace a t o y b et ween h er l eg s

, s t rad dl i n g i t, an d l ean o v er l i k e s h e was

k i s s i ng t h e fl o o r.

4co n si d er t h e res u l t s o f D. H.’ s e xa m ina tion n o rm al

, an d acco rd i n g l y

, h e reco m m en d ed

t h at s h e b e s een fo r a m o re t h o ro u g h fo ren s i c ex am i n at i o n

.

A s o ci al w o rk er co n d u ct ed a fo ren s i c i n terv iew, wh i c h w as reco rd ed an d

p l ay ed fo r t h e ju ry

. In t h e i n t erv i ew, D

. H. ex p l ai n ed t h at Ham b ri ck p u t h i s p en i s in

h er vag i na, b u t t

, an d m o ut h o n m o re t h an o n e occas i o n

, an d t h at th i s o ccu rred wh i l e

t h ey were l i v i ng i n h er g ran dfat h er’ s h o u s e. D. H. st at ed t h at i t h u rt wh en Ham b ri ck

d i d t h i s

, an d s h e u s ed d o l l s t o s h o w t h e ex am i n er ho w s h e was p o s i t i o n e d wh en

Ham b ri ck ab u s ed h er. Th e s o ci al wo rk er t es t i fi ed t h at s h e s aw n o si gn s t h at D. H. h ad

b een co ach ed o r h ad fab ri cat ed t h e al l eg at i o n s

, n ot in g t h at D

. H. was ab l e t o d es cri b e

t h e p o s it i o n o f h er b o d y

, wh at s h e was weari ng

, wh ere s h e was i n th e ro o m

, an d h o w

i t fel t

.

Dr. Gu i dry t es t i fi ed t h at s h e was a n urs e p ract i t io n er w o rk i n g wi t h ch i l d ren o f

s ex u al ab u s e. 4 Sh e p h y s i cal l y ex am i n e d D. H. o n t hree occas i o n s b eg i n n i n g a few

d ay s aft er D. H. was s een i n t h e em erg en cy ro o m . Aft er rev i ewi n g t h e reco rd s fro m

t h e em erg en cy ro om ex am i n at i on

, s h e t es t i fi ed t h at t h e bru i s i n g o n t h e l ab i a i n d i cat ed

s o m e b l u n t fo rce t rau m a, an d t h e i n ju ry o n t h e h y

m en was co ns i s ten t w i t h s ex u al

4 Dr. Gu i d ry

ex p l ai n ed t h at s h e h ad o b t ai n ed a Ph .D i n n u rs i n g

.

5ab u se. Sh e n o t ed t h at t h ere w as n o rep o rt o f an y prev i o us acci d en t o r t r a u m a t h at

wo u l d o t h erwi s e ex p lai n t h os e i n ju ri es

. Dr. Gu i d ry st at ed t h at

, wh en s h e ex am i n ed

an d s p o k e t o D. H

., t h e ch i l d t o l d h er t h at Ham b ri ck pu t h i s p en i s in h er v ag i n a, b u t t

,

an d m o u t h

. On ph y s i cal ex am i n at i on

, h o w ev er, Gu i d ry d i d no t o b s e rv e an y v i s i b l e

i n ju ry t o th e lab i a an d h y m en

, al t h o u gh s he ex pl ai n ed t hat i t wo u l d n o t b e u n us u al fo r

t h e i n ju ri es t o h av e heal ed by t hen

. W h en sh e ex am i n ed t h e an u s

, s h e o b s erv ed wh at

ap p eared t o b e a t ear an d an i n ju ry

, wh i ch co u ld ex pl ai n t h e pai n fu l b o wel m o v em en t s

t h at D. H. ex p eri en ced

. Dr. Gu i d ry ack no wl ed g ed t h at t he t ear co ul d b e t he res u l t o f

t rau m a o r co n s t i pat i o n

, bu t sh e o p i n ed th at i t was co n s is t en t wi t h D. H.’ s al l eg at i on s

an d “ [was ] h i g h ly s u sp i ci ou s fo r s ex u al ab u s e,” rat her t h an co n s t ip at i o n

, b ecau s e al l

rep o rt s i n d i cat ed t h at D. H.’ s s t o o l was s o ft

.

Dr. Gu i d ry fu rt h er t es t i fi ed t hat s h e re-ex am in ed D. H. t wo m ore t i m es aft er t h e

i n i t i al ex am i n at i o n

. In t h es e ex am i n at i o n s, s h e n o t ed t h at t h ere were n o n ew

co m p l ai n t s o f p ai n wh en D. H. u s ed t h e b at h ro o m

, b u t t h ere rem ai n ed s o m e red n es s

i n th e v ag i n al area. Sh e o p i n ed th at t h i s co u ld be th e res u l t o f po o r h y g ien e o r fri ct i o n

fro m cl o t h i n g

, o r i t co u ld h av e b een a n o rm al v ari at i on

. Th e s car t h at h ad been v i s i b l e

o n earl i er ex am i n at i o n h ad h eal ed , an d t he red n es s aro u n d t h e an us was g o n e.

6Th e d efen s e cal led Dr. Ti l l i t s k i

, a l i cen s ed p s yc h o l o g is t

, i n reb u t t al

.

Dr. T i l li t s k i cri t i ci zed t he m an n er i n wh i ch t h e so ci al wo rk er co n d u ct ed D. H.’ s

fo ren s i c i n t erv i ew. He n o t ed t h at s h e u s ed s p eci fi c q u es t i o n s t h at were n o t n eu t ral an d

wh i ch i n creas ed t h e ri s k o f fab ri cat i o n ; t h at D. H

. den i ed an y ab u s e n um ero u s t i m es

b efo re affi rm i n g an y t h i n g h ap p en ed ; t h e i n terv i ewer d i d n o t u s e q u es t i o n s d es i g n ed

t o el i c i t a n arrat i v e; an d t h e i n t erv i ewer t o u ch ed t h e d ol l s i n s t ead of l et ti n g D. H.

d em o n s t rat e wi t h t h em

. He fu rt h er o pi n ed t h at t h e i n t erv i ewer al l o wed th e in t erv i ew

t o g o o n t o o l on g

, an d th at D. H. d id n o t al l eg e an y ab u s e u n t il m o re t h an 2 0 m i n u t es

i n t o t h e i n t erv i ew. He ex p res s ed co n cern t h at D. H

. on l y recei v ed p o s i ti v e res p o n s es

fro m t h e i n t erv i ewer wh en s h e co n fi rm ed t h e al l eg at i on s o f ab u s e.

T he j u ry co n v i ct ed Ham

b ri ck o f al l co u n t s

. Th ereaft er, Ham b r ic k f ile d a m otion

fo r n ew t ri al

, wh i ch h e t wi ce am e n d ed

. Fo l lo wi n g a h eari n g

, at wh i ch t ri al co u n s el

an d a m ed i cal ex p ert t es t i fi ed

, t h e t ri al co u rt d en i ed t h e m ot io n

, bu t res en t en ced

Ham b ri ck t o a term o f i m

pri s o n m en t fo ll o wed b y p ro b at io n

, as req ui red b y OCGA §

1 7 -1 0-6

. 2 . Ham

bri ck n o w ap p eal s

.

1

. In h i s fi rs t en u m erat i o n o f erro r, Ham b ri ck arg u es th at t h e St at e v i o l at ed t h e

d i s co very s t at ut es by fai l i n g t o t u rn o v er Dr. Gu i d ry ’ s t wo fo l l o w -u p ex am i n at i o n

rep o rt s p ri o r t o t ri al

, an d t h e t ri al co urt fai l ed to rem ed y t h i s vi o l at i o n wh en i t d i d n ot

7g ran t a co n t i n u an ce t o g i v e co u n s el t i m e t o rev i ew th e reco rd s an d h i re an ex p ert to

d i s p u t e t h em

. Th i s arg u m en t i s wi t h o u t m eri t

.

Un d er OCGA § 1 7 -1 6 -4 (a) (4 ), t h e St at e i s req u i red t o tu r n o v e r al l ex p ert

rep o rt s p ri o r t o t ri al

. 5 To rem ed y an al l eg ed v i o lat i o n o f t h i s s t at u t e,

[i ] f at an y t i m e d u ri n g t h e co u rs e of t h e p ro ceed i n g s i t i s b ro u g h t t o th e

at t en t i o n o f t h e co u rt th at t h e s t a t e h a s f a i l ed t o co m

pl y wi t h th e

req u i r em en t s o f t h is art i cl e, t h e co u rt m ay o rd er th e st at e t o p erm i t th e

d i s co v ery o r i n s p ect i o n

, i n t erv i ew o f t h e wi t n es s

, g ran t a co n t i n u an ce,

o r, u p on a s h o w i n g o f p reju d i ce an d b ad fai t h

, p ro h i b i t t h e s t at e fro m

i n t ro d u ci n g th e ev i d e n c e n ot d i scl o s ed o r pres en t i n g t h e wi t n es s n o t

d i s cl o s ed

, o r m ay en t er s u ch o t h er ord er as it d eem s ju s t u n d e r th e

ci rcu m s t an ces

.

OCGA § 1 7 -1 6-6

. W e rev i ew t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s rem ed y fo r a d is co v ery v i o l at i o n fo r

ab u se o f d i scret i o n

. Tu b bs v. S t a t e

, 2 7 6 Ga. 7 5 1

, 7 53 -7 5 4 (3 ) (5 8 3 SE2 d 8 5 3 ) (2 0 0 3 ).

In t hi s cas e, befo re t h e ju ry wa s b r o u g h t i n o n t h e s eco nd d ay o f t ri al

,

Ham b ri ck ’ s co u n sel al ert ed t he co u rt t h at , t he d ay b efo re, t h e St at e h ad t u rn ed o v er

t h e m ed i cal reco rd s fro m Dr. G u i d ry ’ s two fo l l o w-u p ex am i nat i o n s an d co un s el h ad

n o t h ad t h e ch an ce t o rev iew t h em

. Tri al co u n s el ack n owl ed g ed t hat t h e St at e h ad

5 Ham bri ck el ect ed t o h av e t h e d is co v ery p r ovisio n s ap p l y

. See OCGA § 1 7 -1 6

-

2 (a).

8o n l y recei v ed t h e reco rd s t h e day b efo re an d h ad p ro v i d ed t h em to d efen s e co u n s el

i m m ed i at el y

. Th e St at e cl ari fi ed t h at i t was n o t seek i n g t o ad m i t t h e ad d i t i o n al

m ed i cal reco rd s

, ju st t h e d o ct or’ s t es t i m o n y ab o u t t h e fo ll o w-u p ex am i nat i on s

. Tri al

c o u n s el t h en arg u ed t h at t h e d oct o r s h o u l d n o t b e al l o wed to t es t i fy t o t h e u l t i m a t e

i s su e i n t h e cas e

– t h at i s

, wh et h er s ex u al ab u s e o ccu rred

. Th e t ri al c o u r t a g r e e d to

g i v e co u n s el t i m e t o rev i ew t h e reco rd s, b u t n o ted t h at n o ne o f t h e t es t i m o n y was a

s u rp ri s e, as i t was cu m

u l at iv e t o wh at h ad al read y b een ad m i t ted

, an d d efen s e co u n s el

h ad b een aware o f t h e fo l lo w-u p ex am i n at io n s fro m t h e i n i t i al d i s co v ery

.

At t h e h eari n g o n t h e m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al , t ri al co u n s el t es t i fi ed t h at s h e h ad

o b ject ed t o t he d i s co v ery v i o l at i o n an d req ues t ed th at t h e reco rd s b e ex cl u d ed

, b u t s h e

co n ced ed t hat s h e d id n o t s p eci fi cal l y m o v e fo r a co n t in u an ce t o rev i ew t h e reco rd s

.

Sh e arg u ed t h at t h es e n ew reco rd s referred t o i n ju ri es co n s i s t en t wi t h ab u se, wh i ch

d i ffered fro m th e o t her m ed i cal t es t i m on y al read y g i v en

. Sh e ad m i t t ed

, h o wev er, t h at

i f th e i n fo rm at i o n ab o u t t h e s u b s eq u en t ex am i n at i o n s was part o f d i s co very t h e St at e

i n i t i al l y pro v i d ed

, s h e wo ul d h av e b een aware o f t h e fo ll ow-u p ex am i n at i o n s

.

W e can no t s ay t h at t h e t ri al co u rt ab u s ed i ts d i s cret io n h ere. Fi rs t

, we n o t e t h at

,

al t h o u g h t r i al co u n s el o bject ed t o t h e reco rd s an d t es t i m o n y

, co u n s el d i d n o t m o v e

fo r a co n t i n u an ce. No t ab l y

, H am b ri ck co m

pl ai n s on l y o f t h e t es t i m o n y referen ci n g

9t h e fo l lo w-u p ex am i n at i on s , an d n o t Dr. Gu id ry ’ s i ni ti al fi n di n g s . Bu t Dr. Gu i d ry ’ s

t es t i m o ny ab o u t t h es e fo l l o w-u p ex am i n at i o n s was g en eral l y co n s i st en t wi t h h er

i n i t i a l t es t i m on y

, an d t ri al co u ns el w as ab le t o cro s s -ex am i n e D r. G u i d ry as t o an y

i n co n s i s t en ci es

. Becau s e t ri al c o u n s el d i d n o t req u es t a co n t in u an ce an d h as n ot

s h o wn t h at Ham

b ri ck was p reju d i ced b y t h e al l eg ed d i sco v ery vi o l at i o n, t h i s al l eg ed

erro r d oes n o t req u ire rel ie f

. Mu r r a y v. S ta te

, 29 3 Ga. Ap p

. 5 1 6

, 5 1 8 -5 19 (2 ) (6 6 7

SE2 d 3 8 2) (2 0 0 8).

M o reo v er, t h e reco rd refl ect s t h at t h e t ri al co u rt g av e t ri al co u n sel ad d i t i o n al

t i m e t o rev i ew t h e reco rd s

, n o t i n g t h at Dr. Gu i d ry ’ s t es t i m o ny ab ou t t h e fo l l o w-u p

e x a m i n at i o n s s h o u l d n o t hav e b een a s urp ri s e g i v en th at t h e reco rd s were al r e a d y

p ro d uced i n d i sco very

. See Cu s h en b er r y v. S t a te

, 30 0 Ga. 1 9 0

, 1 9 5 (2 ) (c) (7 9 4 SE2 d

1 6 5 ) (2 0 16 ) (t ri al co u rt ’ s rem ed y o f g i v i n g t ri al co u n s el t i m e t o rev i ew reco rd s was

n o t an ab u se of di s cret io n wh ere t he ex pert ’ s al l eg at i o n s were n o t a s u rp ri s e an d d id

n o t al t er t h e d efen s e t h eo ry ). A cco rd i ng l y

, we co n cl u d e t h at t h ere w as n o ab u s e o f

d i s cret i o n , an d a n ew t ri al was n o t warran t ed o n t h i s b as i s

.

2

. Ham b ri ck n ex t arg u es t h at h e recei v ed i n effect iv e as s i s t an ce of co u n s el d u e

t o co un s el ’ s fai l u re to (a) s eek a co nt i n u an ce o r i n v es t i g at e t he n ew m ed i cal ev i d en ce

i n Dr. Gu i d ry ’ s seco n d rep o rt

, an d (b ) o b j ect t o hears ay t es t i m on y fro m o n e o f t h e

10p o l i ce o ffi cers

. 6 He co nt en d s t h at h e w a s p reju d i ced b y co u n s el ’ s d efi ci en t

p erfo rm an ce, an d th at t h e ad d i ti o n al rep o rt w as no t cu m ul at iv e of o t h er ev i d en ce. W e

d i s ag ree.

To s u cceed o n a cl ai m t h at co u ns el was co n s t i t u t i o n a l l y i n effect i v e,

[Ham b ri ck ] m u s t s h o w b o t h t h at h i s at to rn ey’s perfo rm an ce w as

d efi ci en t

, an d t h a t h e was preju d i ced as a res u l t

. S t r i ckl a nd v.

W a s h i n g to n

, 4 6 6 U. S. 6 6 8

, 6 8 7 (III) (1 04 SCt 2 0 5 2

, 8 0 LE2 d 6 7 4 )

(1 9 8 4 ). Un d er t h e fi rs t p ro n g o f t h i s t es t

, co u n s el ’ s p erfo rm an ce wi l l be

fo u n d d efi ci en t o n l y i f i t was o bject i v el y u n reas o n ab l e u n d er th e

ci rcu m s t an ces an d i n l i g ht o f p rev ai l i n g p ro fes s i o nal n o rm s

. An d u nd er

t h e s eco n d p r o n g

, p reju d i ce i s dem o n s t rat ed o n ly wh ere t h ere is a

reas o n ab l e p ro b ab i li t y t hat

, ab sen t co un s el ’ s erro rs

, t h e res u l t o f t h e t ri al

wo u ld h av e been di fferen t

. A “ reas o n ab l e pro b ab i l it y ” i s defi n ed as a

p ro b ab i l i t y s u ffi ci en t t o u n d erm i n e co n fi d en ce i n t h e o ut co m e. Fai l u re

t o s at i s fy ei th er p ro n g o f t h e S t ri ckl a n d tes t i s s u ffi ci en t t o defeat a cl ai m

o f i n effect i v e as s i s tan ce, an d i t i s n o t i n c u m b en t u p o n t h is Co u rt t o

ex am i n e t h e o t h er p ro n g

. A n d a l t h o u g h b o t h th e p erfo rm an ce an d

p reju d i ce co m

p o n en t s o f an i n effect i ven e s s i n q ui ry i nv o l v e m i x ed

q u es t i o n s o f l aw an d fact

, a tri al co u rt ’ s fact u al fi n d in g s m ad e i n th e

co u rs e o f d eci d i n g an i n effect i v e as s is tan ce of co un s el cl ai m wi l l be

affi rm ed b y

t h e rev i ewi n g co u rt u n l es s cl earl y erro n eo u s

.

6 T h e t ri al o ccu rred i n 2 0 1 3 an d

, t h erefo re, ou r n e w Ev i d en ce Co de ap p l i ed

. Pa r ker v. S t a t e , 2 9 6 Ga. 5 8 6 , 5 8 8 (1 ) (7 6 9 SE2 d 3 2 9 ) (2 0 1 5 ).

11(Ci t at i o n s an d p un ct u at i on o m it t ed .) Gr een v. S t a t e , 3 0 2 Ga. 8 1 6 , 8 17 -8 1 8 (2 ) (8 0 9

SE2 d 7 3 8 ) (2 0 1 8 ). W i t h t h es e s t an d ard s i n m i n d, we tu rn t o Ham b ri ck ’s cl ai m s o f

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

.

a. Fai l u re t o s eek co n t in uan ce an d i n v es ti g at e m ed ical reco rd s

Ham b ri ck co n ten d s th at t ri al co u n sel w as d e f i ci en t i n fai l i n g t o req u es t a

co n ti n u an ce an d t o i n v es t i g at e t h e m ed i cal reco rd s b ecau s e, i f h e h ad b een g i v en t i m e

t o rev i ew t h e rep o rt

, h e wo u l d h av e s u b m i t t ed reb u t t al ex p ert t e s t i m o n y fro m

Dr. In g ram -J on es

. W e are n o t pers u ad ed

.

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

, Dr. In g ram -J o nes

, a p e d i at ri c n u rs e

p ract i t i o n er an d ped i at ri c m ed i cal fo ren s i c ex am i n er, t es t i fi ed as an ex p ert i n t h e fi el d

o f fo ren s i c s ex u al as sau lt an d ab u s e. D r. In g ram -J o n es cri ti ci zed Dr. Gu i d ry ’ s l ack

o f k no wl ed g e of D. H.’ s m ed i cal h i s t o ry

, as wel l as D r. Gu i d ry ’ s fai l u re t o fo l l o w u p

r e g ard i n g th e al l eg ed co n s t i p at i o n

. Sh e n o t ed t h at Dr. Zi eg l er fo u nd red n es s o n t h e

l ab i a an d d i s co l o rat i o n o n t h e h y m en

, as wel l as eczem a, b u t Dr. G u i d ry saw n o n e o f

t h es e t h i n g s a few d ay s lat er. In s t ead

, Dr. Gu i d ry n ot ed an an al t ear an d scarri n g n ot

fo u n d i n Dr. Zi eg ler’ s ex am i nat i o n

. Dr. In g ram -J o n es o p i n ed t h at Dr. Zi eg l er wo u ld

h av e b een ab l e t o see s u ch a scar l i k e t hi s o ne wi t h ou t th e u s e o f s p eci al eq u i p m en t

.

12M o reo v er, Dr. Zi eg l er di d n o t i d en ti fy an y i n ju ry a s a c u t e

, w h ereas Dr. Gu i d ry

co n si d ered t h e an al t ear t o b e an acu t e i nju ry

.

Dr. In gram -J on es fu rt h er t es ti fi ed t h at t h e ab n o rm al i t y al o n g t h e an u s co u ld

h a v e b e e n a no rm al vari at i o n an d d i d n o t ap p ear t o b e an i n ju ry

. Dr. In g ram -J o n es

ack n owl ed ged t hat Dr. Gu i d ry ’ s n o t es referen ced t h e al l eg ed i n ju ry a s a p o s s i b l e

n o rm al v ari at i o n

. Dr. In gram

- J o n e s o p i n ed t h at co n s t i p at i o n co u l d ex pl ai n t h e an al

t eari n g

, an d s he d es cri b ed t h i s i n fo rm at i o n ab o u t p o ss i b l e c o n s t i p at io n, wh i ch Dr.

Gu i dry i g n o red

, as a “ g am e-ch an g er.” Sh e ad m i t t ed

, h owev er, t h at Dr. Zi eg l er n o t ed

t h at t he ch i ld ’ s s to m ach w as s u p p l e an d t h ere were n o rm al b owel s o u n d s

. D r. In g ram

J o n es i d en ti fi ed reas o n s fo r t h e d i s co l o rat i o n of t h e h y m en an d t h e red n es s aro u n d t h e

l ab i a t h at wo u l d b e ex p ect ed o f a ch il d

, s u ch as po t t y t rai n in g o r p o o r h y g i en e.

Dr. In g ram -J o n es ad m i t t ed

, h o wev er, t h at sh e d i d n ot rev iew an y i n f o rm at io n fro m

t h e fam i l y reg ard i n g co n s t i p at io n

, d i d n o t h av e th e d i g i t al p h o t o s o f t h e ex am an d

rev i ewed o nl y th e co p i es

, w hi ch s h e ack n o wl ed g ed di d n o t g i v e a cl ear v i ew, an d h ad

n o k no wl ed g e o f wh et h er D

. H. was p o t t y t rai n ed

. Acco rd i ng to Dr. In g ram -J on es

, t h e

o n l y fi n d i n g h ere t h at wo u l d h av e been a co n cern fo r h er was t h e d i s co l orat i o n o f t h e

h y m en

.

13Ham

b ri ck h as n o t s h o w n h o w h e w as p reju d i ced b y t ri al co u n s e l ’ s fai l u re to

req u es t a co n t i n u an ce b ecau s e Dr. In g ram -J o n es ’ s tes t im on y was cu m u l at iv e o f t h e

o t h er m ed i cal tes ti m on y ad m it t ed

. M o reo v er, t h e ev i d en ce ag ai n s t Ham b ri ck was

s t ro n g

, an d tri al co u n sel co n d u ct ed a t h o ro u g h cro s s -ex am i nat i o n o f Dr. Gu i d ry

,

el i ci t i n g t es t i m o n y t h at co n s ti p at i o n was o n e p o ss i b le cau s e o f t he an al t eari n g an d

t h at t h e red n es s co u l d b e a n o rm al v ari at i o n o r t he res ul t o f p o or hy gi en e as o p p o s ed

t o m o l es t at i o n. 7 S

a n ch i o u s v. S t a t e

, 3 5 1 Ga. Ap p

. 6 11

, 6 2 0

- 6 2 1 (2 ) (d ) (8 3 1 SE2 d

8 4 3 ) (2 0 1 9 ) (d efen d an t di d n ot es t ab l is h p reju d i ce w h e r e he fai l ed t o s h o w t h at

p ro ffered ex p ert ’ s t es ti m o n y was d i fferen t o r m o re fav o rab le t h an t es t i m o n y o b t ai n ed

at tri al ); Co b b v. S ta t e

, 3 4 8 Ga. Ap p

. 21 0

, 2 15 (2 ) (b ) (8 2 0 SE2 d 2 4 1 ) (2 0 1 8 ) (n o

s h o wi n g o f i n effect i v e as s i s t an ce o f co u ns el wh ere cro s s -ex am i n at i o n of St at e’ s

ex p ert res ul t ed i n s im i lar t es t i m o n y t o th at p ro ffered b y t h e d e fen s e’ s ex p ert ).

No t ab l y

, Dr. In g ram -J o nes ad m i t t ed t h at t he di s co lo rat i o n o f th e h y m en w as a cau s e

fo r co n cern

. In t h i s m an n er, as t h e t r i a l co u rt co rrect l y fo u n d

, In g ram -J o n es ’ s

t es t i m o n y wo u l d hav e b een cu m ul at i v e, an d t he fai l u re t o cal l an ex p ert wi t n e s s

7 W e n o t e th at o n e o f t h e al l eg ed i n co n s i s ten ci es Ham b ri ck co m

p lai n s o f i s

Dr. G u i d ry ’ s tes ti m on y t h at t h e an al in ju ry was acu te. Bu t t h i s t es t i m o n y d i d no t co m e

o u t i n d irect ex am i n at i on ; rat h er, t ri al co u n s el as k ed Dr. G u i d ry on cro ss -ex am i n at i o n

i f s he wo u l d co n s id er t h e an al i n ju ry acu t e, t o wh i ch t h e d o ct o r res p o n d ed y es

.

14wh o s e t es t i m o n y was cu m ul at i v e can n o t es t ab l i s h th e p reju d i ce pro n g o f an

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

. See Ro l l a n d v. S t a te

, 32 1 Ga. Ap p

. 6 6 1

, 6 6 8

(3 ) (a) (7 4 2 SE2 d 4 8 2 ) (2 0 1 3); s ee al s o Go m ez v. S t a t e

, 3 0 1 Ga. 4 4 5, 4 5 7 -4 5 8 ( 5 )

(8 0 1 SE2 d 8 4 7) ( 2 0 1 7 ) (d efen d an t fai l ed t o s h o w p reju d i ce fro m t ri al co u n sel ’ s

fai l u re t o p res en t ex pert t es t i m o n y i n reb u t t al wh ere ex p ert n ev er ex am in ed v i ct i m

,

g av e eq u i v o cal fi nd i n g s

, was no t an ex p ert i n t he fi el d

, an d t h e t ri al co u r t

, w h i ch

h eard t h e t es t i m o ny at t he n ew t ri al h eari n g

, d i d n o t fi n d ex p ert cred i b l e).

Acco rd in g ly , t h i s cl ai m

o f erro r fai l s

.

b . Hears ay

ev i d en ce

Ham b ri ck n ex t arg u es t h at h e recei v ed i n effect i v e as s i s t an ce of co u n s el wh en

t ri al co u n s el f

a i l ed t o ob

ject to a p o l i ce o ffi cer’ s t es t i m o n y becau s e su ch t es t i m o ny

was h ears ay an d v i o l at ed th e Co n fro n t at i o n Cl au s e. Bu t Ham b ri ck h as no t s h o wn t h at

h e was p reju d i ced

.

At t ri al

, an i n v es t ig at i n g o ffi cer wi t h t he J o h n s Creek p o l i ce d ep art m en t

t es t i fi ed t h at a m ed i cal res i d en t wh o ex am i n ed D

. H. al o n g wi t h Dr. Zi eg l er t o l d h i m

t h at s h e h ad ex am i n e d D

. H

. an d n o ted b ru i s i n g o n D

. H.’ s l ab i a, as wel l as

d i s co l o rat i o n an d m ark i n g aro u n d t h e an us

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

15t ri al

, t ri al co u n s el t es t i fi ed t hat s h e s h o u l d hav e o b j ect ed t o t h e tes t im on y o n h ears ay

g ro u nd s i f t h e res i d en t h ad n o t al read y t es t i fi ed

.

Al t h ou g h t h e res i d en t d i d n o t t es t ify at t ri al

, t h e reco rd i s cl ear t h at Dr. Zi eg l er,

wh o d i d t es t i f

y at t ri al

, m ad e t h e s am e ob s erv at io n s

. Acco rd i n g l y

, t he h ears ay

t es t i m o ny was cu m

u l at i v e o f p ro p erl y ad m i t t ed t es t i m o n y

, an d an y erro r i n al l o wi n g

i t was h arm l es s

. Sa n ch i o us

, 3 51 Ga. Ap p

. at 6 1 6 (1 ) (b ). A s a res u l t

, Ham b ri ck can n ot

s h o w t h at h e was p reju d i ced b y co un s el ’ s p erfo rm an ce. Fo r t h is s am e reas o n,

Ham b ri ck ’ s ch al l en g e o n Co n fro n t at i o n Cl au s e g ro u n d s al so fai l s

. Ja cks o n v. S t a t e

,

3 5 0 Ga. Ap p

. 8 0

, 8 1 (2 ) (8 2 7 SE2 d 91 9 ) (2 0 1 9 ) (“ W h en h ears ay ev i den ce i s

erro neo u s l y ad m i t t ed i n v i o l at i o n o f th e co n fro n t a t i o n c l au s e, s u ch an erro r o f

co n st i t u t io n al m ag n i t u d e can b e h arm l es s wh en t h e ev i den c e a t i s s u e i s cu m u l at i v e

o f o t he r p ro p erl y ad m i t t ed ev i d en ce o r wh en t h e ev i d en ce ag ai n s t t he d efen d an t i s

o v erwh el m i ng .”) (ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at io n o m it t ed ).

3

. In hi s t h ird arg u m en t

, Ham b ri ck co n t en ds t h at th e t ri al co u rt i m p ro p e r l y

l i m i ted t h e t es t i m o n y o f hi s ex p ert

, Dr. Ti l l it s ki

, b eca u s e t h e t es t i m o n y was

p erm i s s i b l e u n d er OCGA §§ 2 4 -6 -6 2 0 an d 2 4 -7 -7 0 2

. H e co n t en d s th at t h e t ri al co u rt

p rev en ted h i s ex p ert fro m t es t i fy i n g ab o u t t h e d i s cl o s u re b ecau s e it was b as ed o n

h ears ay an d wen t t o th e u l t i m at e is s u e i n t h e cas e. He n o t es t h at an ex pert m ay b as e

16h i s o p i ni o n s o n h e a rs ay ev i d en ce, an d t h at t h e t ri al co u rt d i d no t li m i t t h e St at e’ s

ex p ert s i n t h e s am e m an n er.

W e r e v i ew a t ri al co u rt ’ s ru l i n g o n t h e ad m is s i b i l i t y o f ex p ert tes t i m o n y fo r

ab u se o f d i s cr e t i o n

. H

a yn es v. S t a t e

, 3 3 4 Ga. Ap p

. 7 2 8

, 7 3 1 (2 ) (7 8 0 SE2 d 3 9 7 )

(2 0 1 5). Aft er a t h o ro ug h rev i ew o f t h e reco rd

, we co n cl u d e t h at t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n ot

ab u se i t s d i s cret i o n i n l i m it i n g Dr. Ti l l it s k i ’ s t es t i m o ny h ere.

At t ri al

, Ham

b ri ck p res en t ed D r. Ti l l it s ki ’ s t es t i m o ny t o cri t i ci ze t h e fo ren s i c

i n t erv i ew t ech n i q u e. Dr. Ti ll i ts k i

, wh o i s a p s y ch ol og i st

, st at ed t h at h e rev i ewed

cert ai n d ocu m en t s t o fo rm h i s o p i n i o n reg ard i n g th e ci rcu m s tan ces o f th e d is cl o s u re,

i n cl u d i n g t he p ol i ce rep o rt

. He th en p ro ceed ed to m en t i on i n fo rm at i o n fro m t h e p oli ce

rep o rt t h at h e h ad co n s i d ered i n reach i n g h i s o pi n i o n

, an d t h e St at e o b ject ed o n

h ears ay gro un d s

. Aft er a l en g t h y d i s cu s s i o n wi th t ri al co u n s el

, t h e t ri al co u rt

p erm i t t ed Dr. Ti l l i ts k i t o t es t i fy ab o u t t h e fo ren s i c i n t erv iew p ro ces s

, b u t n o t t h e

co n ten t s o f th e p o l i ce rep o rt

. Tri al co u n s el t hen s o u g h t t o el ici t t es t i m o n y t h a t t h e

m an n er o f th e o ut cry was co n s i s t en t wi t h a ri s k o f fab ri cat i on

, m u ch l i k e t h e St at e’ s

wi t n es s t es t i fi ed t h at t h e fo ren s i c i n t erv iew was co n s i s t en t wi th ab u s e.

N o t ab l y

, t h e reco rd refl ect s co n fu s i o n ov er ex act l y wh at tri al co u n s el was

t ry i n g t o el i ci t fro m t h e ex p ert

. Th e t ri al co urt rep eat ed ly s t a t ed t h at i t wo u l d n ot

17al l o w t h e ex p ert t o act as “ a l i e d et ect o r,” an d t ri al co u n s el ex p lai n ed t h at s h e w a s

t ry i n g t o es t ab l i s h wh at an i n t erv i ewer s h o ul d l o o k fo r t o d et erm i n e i f an al l eg at i o n

was fab ri cat ed o r t ai n t ed

. Tri al co u n s el arg u ed t hat t h e St at e’ s w i tn es s es h ad b een

al l o wed t o t es ti fy b as ed o n h ears ay

, b u t t h e t ri al c o u r t d is ag reed an d no t ed t h at t h e

o t h er wi t n es s es t es t i fi ed fro m t h ei r p ers o n al o b s erv at i o ns

, wh ereas t h i s ex p ert was

t es t i fy i ng b as ed o n wh at h e read i n a p ol i ce rep ort . Co u n s el t h en ex p l ai n ed t h at s h e

was t ry i n g t o as k t h e e x p e r t wh et her t h e o u tcry h ad ch aract eri s t ics t h at rai s ed red

fl ag s

, n ot wh et h er D. H. was t el l i n g t he t ru th

. An d, al t h o u g h t h e St at e o bject ed o n t h e

g ro u nd t hat t h e wi t n es s w as o n ly an ex p ert i n fo ren si c i nt e rv i ews an d n o t cas e

an al y s i s, t h e t ri al co urt al lo wed t h e ex p ert t o t es t i fy ab o ut t he t y p es o f o u t cry t h at

were l es s l ik el y t o be t h e res u l t o f a s cri p t ed or fab ri cat ed m em o ry

. Th e t ri al co u rt

u l t i m at el y

al l o wed Dr. Ti ll i t s k i t o t es ti fy ab o u t t h e ci rcu m s t an ces o f t h e d is cl o s u re,

b u t n o t ab ou t t h e fact s h e h ad o b t ai n ed fro m t h e p o l i ce rep o rt

. 8 Dr. Ti l l i t s k i t h en

t es t i fi ed ab o u t scri p t ed m em o ri es an d s p o n tan eo u s o ut cry an d wh et h er, i n his opinion

,

D. H.’ s d i s cl o s u re co u l d h av e b een s cri p t ed

.

8 Dr. Ti l l i t s k i t es t i fi ed t h at he had co n cern s ab o u t t h e fo ren s i c i n t erv i ew p ro ces s

b ecau s e t h e fam i l y had b een “ l eery ” o f Ham b ri ck fo r s o m e ti m e. T h e St at e o b ject ed

t o t h is t es t i m o n y as b as ed o n h ears ay an d as i n co n s is t en t w i t h t h e t es t i m o n y i n t h e

reco rd

.

18A rev i ew of t h e reco rd co n fi rm s th at t h e t ri al co u rt di d n ot ab u s e i t s d i s cret i o n

b y li m i t i n g Dr. Ti ll i t s k i ’ s t es t im o n y

. Th e t ri al co u rt al l o wed t h e ex p ert t o t es t i fy at

l e n g t h ab o u t t h e fo ren s i c i n t erv i ew an d wh at h e o p in ed were p ro bl em s wi t h t h e

p ro ces s

, as wel l as wh y cert ai n ou t cri es w ere m o re li k el y to b e th e res u l t o f a s cri p t ed

res p o n s e. See O CGA § 24 -7 -7 0 7 (“ In cri m i nal p ro ceed i n g s

, th e o p in i o ns o f ex p ert s

o n an y qu es t i o n o f s ci en ce, s ki l l

, t rad e, o r li k e q u es t i o n s s h al l al way s b e ad m i s s i b l e;

an d s u ch o p i n i o n s m ay b e g i v en o n t h e fact s as p ro v ed b y o t h er wi t n es s es .”); OCGA

§ 2 4-7 -7 0 4 (a) (ex p ert m ay g iv e o p in i on th at g o es t o t he u l t i m at e i ss u e i n t h e cas e).

M o reo v er, Dr. Ti l l i t s k i was p erm i t t ed t o rel y o n t h e p o li ce rep ort to fo rm h is o p i n i o n s

.

See S mi t h v. S t a t e

, 2 0 1 9 WL 5 3 0 1 7 7 3

,

_ _ Ga.

__ (6 ) (8 3 4 SE2 d 75 0

, 7 5 9-7 6 1 (6 ))

(2 0 1 9); see al s o Lu

po e v. S t a t e

, 3 0 0 Ga. 23 3

, 2 4 4 (4 ) (7 9 4 SE2 d 6 7 ) (2 0 1 6 ) (ex p ert s

m ay s o m et im es rel y o n an d t es t i fy ab o u t o t h erwi s e i nad m i s si b l e h ears ay reg ard i n g

t h e i r o p i n i o n s ); Da vi s v. S t a te

, 2 9 9 Ga. 1 8 0

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

(reco g n i zi n g t h at an ex pert m ay l i s t en t o t h e tes t i m on y at t ri al an d u s e t h at

i n fo rm at i o n t o fo rm

t h e b as i s o f h i s o p i n i o ns ).

W h at t h e t ri al co u rt p ro h i b i t ed was t h e ex pert ’ s t es t im on y ab o u t t h e co n t en t

s

o f t h e p ol i ce rep o rt s

. No n e o f o u r ru l es o f ev i d en ce di rect l y al l o w s u ch t es ti m o n y

. See

OCGA § 2 4 -7 -7 0 3 (ex p ert m ay rel y o n i nad m i s s i b l e ev i d en ce i n fo rm i ng o p i n i o n

, b ut

19g en eral l y m ay n o t t es t i fy t o t h e co n t en t o f t h e in ad m i s s i bl e e v i d e n c e ). In fact

, t ri al

co u ns el co nced ed t h at t h e tri al co u rt co u l d “ l i m i t [t h e ex pert ] fro m go i n g i n t o s p eci fi c

t h i n g s o f t h e p o l i ce rep o rt .” Th at i s p reci s el y wh at t h e t ri al co u rt d i d. 9

To t he ex t en t t h at Ham

b ri ck co n t en d s t h at t h e St at e’ s wi t n es s es were n ot

l i m i ted i n th e s am e m an n er, hi s arg u m en t is w i th o u t m eri t

. As t h e t ri al co u rt n o t ed

,

t h e St at e’ s wi t nes ses t es t i fi ed as t o t h ei r o wn p ers o nal k n o wl ed g e an d n o t b as ed o n

h ears ay i n fo rm a t i o n fro m an o th er s o urce. M o reo v er, Dr. Ti l l i t s k i was p erm i t t ed to

t es t i fy ex t en si v el y

as t o h i s o p in i o n reg ard i n g p ro b l em s wi t h t h e fo ren s i c i nt erv i ew

an d reas o n s wh y , i n h i s o p i ni o n

, D. H.’ s o u tcry co u l d h av e b een fab ri cat ed

. Ra yn er

v. St a t e

, 3 0 7 Ga. Ap p

. 8 6 1

, 86 4 -8 6 5 (2 ) (7 0 6 SE2 d 20 5 ) (2 0 11 ) (ex p ert co u ld t es t i fy

t o t h e p ro p ri et y of t he i n t erv i ew t ech n i q u es

, b u t n o t ab ou t a w i t nes s ’ s b el i ev ab i l it y ).

Th e o n l y l i m it at i o n t h e t ri al co u rt p l aced o n t h e wi t n es s ’ s t es t im o n y was to ex cl u d e

t e s t i m o n y ab o u t t h e co n t en ts o f t h e p o l ice rep o rt o n wh i ch h e rel i ed in fo rm i n g h i s

9 W e n o t e th at t h e St at e arg u ed at ti m e s t h a t t h e ex p ert co u l d n ot b as e h i s

o p i n i o n o n h ears ay

ev i d e n c e o r g i v e an o p i n i o n t h at rel at ed t o th e ul t i m at e i s s u e in

t h e cas e. In t h i s res p ect

, t h e St at e was i n co rrect

. See OCGA § § 2 4-7 -7 0 3 ; 2 4 -7 -7 0 4.

B u t t h e reco rd refl ect s t h at th e tri al co u rt was co n cern ed t hat t h e ex p ert w a s

co m m en t i n g o n D. H .’ s t ru t h fu l n es s

, wh ich was i n ap p ro p ri at e, an d t h at i t ag reed t h at

t h e ex p ert co ul d t es t i fy as t o t h e t y p es o f o u tcri es an d t he ri s k o f a s cri p t ed res p o n s e

o r fab ri cat i o n.

20o p i n i o n

. Acco rd i ng l 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 o n i n li m i t i n g Dr.

Ti l l it s k i ’ s t es t i m o n y , an d we fi n d t h is en u m erat i o n t o b e wi t h o u t m eri t

.

4

. Ham bri ck al s o co n ten d s t h at t h e t ri al co u rt p l ai nl y erred i n al l o wi n g t h e

m o t h e r an d great -g ran d m o t h er t o t es t i fy t h at t h ere w as a DNA t es t co nfi rm i n g

Ham b ri ck was D. H.’ s fat h er b ecau s e s u ch t es t i m o n y w as h ears ay

. H e as s ert s t h at

, in

t h e ab s en ce o f D NA res u l t s

, t h e St at e d i d n o t p ro v e co n s an gu i n i ty fo r p u rp o s es o f t h e

i n ces t ch arg e. Th i s arg u m en t i s m i s p l aced

.

Ham b ri ck d i d n o t o b

j ect t o t h e t es t i m o n y at t ri al

, an d t h erefo re we rev i ew fo r

p l ai n erro r. OCGA § 2 4 -1 -1 0 3 (a), (d ). See al s o Pi er ce v. S t a t e

, 3 02 Ga. 3 89

, 3 9 3 -3 9 4

(1 ) (c) (8 0 7 SE2 d 4 2 5) (2 01 7 ).

To es t ab l is h p l ai n erro r, Ham b ri ck m u s t s h o w

a n e r ro r o r d efect

— s o m e s o rt o f d ev i at i on fro m a l eg al ru l e— t h at has

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

w a i v e d

, b y t h e ap pel l an t

. Seco nd

, t h e l eg al erro r m u st b e cl ear o r

o b v i o u s

, rat h er t h an s u b

ject t o reas o n ab le d i s p u te. Th i rd

, th e erro r m u s t

h av e affect 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 h e m

u s t d em o n s t rat e t h at i t affect ed t h e o u t co m e o f t h e t ri al

co u rt p r o c e e d i n g s. Fo u rt h an d fi nal l y

, i f t h e ab o v e t h ree p ro n g s are

s a t i s fi ed

, t h e ap p el l at e co u rt h as t h e d i scret i o n t o rem ed y t h e

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

21affect 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

.

(Pu n ct u at i on an d em

p h as i s om it t ed .) S t a t e v. Kel l y

, 2 9 0 Ga. 2 9

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

2 3 2 ) (2 0 1 1 ). Ham

b ri ck h as n ot m et h i s b u rd en

.

At t h e m o t i o n fo r n ew tri al h eari n g

, t ri al co u ns el t es t i fi ed t h at sh e u n d ers t o o d

Ham b ri ck t o b e t h e ch il d ’ s fat her an d t h at Ham b ri ck n ev er i n fo rm ed h er o t h erwi s e.

Th u s, t h e t h eo ry o f d efen s e was n o t a l ack o f co n s an gu i n i ty , b ut rat h er t h at t h e act s

n ev er h ap p en ed at al l.

In an y ev en t

, al t h o u g h b o t h t he m o t h er an d g reat -g ran d m o t h er t es t i fi ed t h at

t h ere was a DNA t es t co n fi rm i n g Ham b ri ck was D. H.’ s fat h er, an d n o DNA t es t was

ev er ad m i t t ed

, t h i s t es t im o n y was h arm l es s

. Un d er O CGA § 1 6 -6 -2 2 (a), “ [a] p ers o n

co m m i t s t h e o ffen s e o f i n ces t wh en s u ch pers o n en g ag es i n s ex u al in t erco u rs e o r

s o d o m y

, . . . wi t h a p ers o n wh o m h e o r sh e k n o w s h e o r s h e i s rel a t ed t o ei t h er b y

b l o o d o r b

y m a rr i a g e as fo l l ows : (1 ) F at h er an d ch i ld o r s t ep ch i l d [.] ” (em p h as i s

s u p p li ed ). Th e u n d i sp u t ed ev i d en ce w a s t h a t H am b ri ck an d D. H.’ s m ot h er were

m arri ed a t t h e t i m e o f t h e ab u s e. Th erefo re, Ham b ri ck w as rel at ed t o D. H. by

m arri ag e reg ard l es s o f wh et h er h e was rel at ed to D. H. b y bl o o d

, an d t h ere was n o

n eed t o ad m i t an y DNA ev i d en ce t o es t ab l i sh i n ces t . As su ch

, an erro r i n ad m i t t i n g

22t h i s h ears ay ev i den ce d i d n o t aff e c t Ha m b r i ck ’ s s u b s t an t i al ri g h t s

, an d h e fai l s to

s h o w p l ai n erro r.

5

. In h i s n ex t en um erat i o n o f erro r, Ham b ri ck co n t en d s t hat t h e ev i d en ce was

i n s u ffi ci en t t o p ro v e v en u e wi t h res p ect to t h e rap e

, i n c e s t

, an d cru el t y t o ch i l d ren

co u nt s becau s e th os e act s al l eg ed l y o ccu rred i n Vi n e Ci t y

, an d t h ere was n o t es t i m o ny

t o s h o w t h at Vi n e Ci t y

was i n Fu l to n Co u nt y

. W e d i s ag ree.

As a gen eral ru l e, ou r Co n st it u t i o n p ro vi d es t h at a cri m i nal

cas e m u s t b e t ri ed i n t h e co u n ty wh ere t h e cri m e w as

co m m it t ed

, an d wh en v en u e i s in is s ue, it is a j u ri s d i ct i o nal

fact t h at m

u s t b e p ro v ed b y

t h e St at e b ey o n d a reas o n ab l e

d ou b t

. Ev en s o

, v en u e g en eral ly i s a q ues t i o n fo r t h e ju ry

,

an d o n d i rect ap p eal

, t h e ev i d en ce m us t b e v i ewed i n th e

l i g h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t he v erd i ct o f t h e ju ry

, a n d t h e

v erd i c t m

u s t b e s u s tai n ed as t o ven u e s o l o ng as th e

ev i den ce wo u l d perm i t a rat i o n al ju ry t o fi n d b ey o n d a

reas o n ab l e d o u b t t h at v en ue was p ro p erl y l ai d

.

(Ci t at i o n s , p u n ct u at i o n

, an d fo ot n o tes om i t t ed ). M a r t in v. McLa u g h l in , 2 9 8 Ga. 4 4,

4 5 -4 6 (7 7 9 SE2 d 29 4 ) (2 0 1 5 ); s ee al s o Ga. Co n s t

. o f 19 8 3, Art

. VI, Sec. II, Par. VI.

As Ham b ri ck co n ced es

, t h ere was su ffi ci en t ev i d en ce t o es t ab l i sh t h a t t h e

g ran d fat h er’ s h ou s e i n Al p h aret t a was i n Fu l t o n C o u n t y

. D. H.’ s t es t i m o ny

es t ab l i s h ed t h at t h e ab u s e un d erl y i ng t h e rap e, i n ces t

, an d cru el t y t o ch i l d ren ch arg es

23h ap pen ed at t h e g ran d fat her’ s h o u s e m o re t h an o nce. Vi ewi n g t he ev i d en ce i n t h e

l i gh t m o s t fav o rab le to th e v erd i ct

, t h i s t es ti m o n y w as s u ffi ci en t fo r t h e ju ry t o

co n cl u d e t h at t h e St at e es t ab li s h ed t h e cri m es o ccu rred i n Fu l t o n Co u n ty

.

6

. Ham b ri ck n ex t arg u es t h at t h e t ri al co urt erred i n fai l i n g to m erg e t h e rap e

co n vi ct i o n wi t h t h e cru el ty t o ch i l d ren co n v i ct i o n b ecau s e t h e t wo co u n t s req u i red t h e

s am e ev id en ce. W e d i s cern n o erro r.

Un d er OCGA § 1 6 -1 -7 (a) (1 ), an accu s ed m ay n ot be co n v ict ed o f m o re

t h an on e cri m e i f o n e c r i m e i s i ncl u d ed i n t he o t h er. A cri m e i s

co n s i d ered t o be i ncl u d ed i n t h e o th er i f i t i s es t ab l i s h ed b y pro o f o f th e

s am e o r l es s t h an al l t h e fact s t h an i s req u i red t o es t ab l i s h t h e

co m m i s s i o n o f t h e cri m e ch arg ed

. In co n s i deri n g wh et h er cri m es m erg e

u n d er t h at s tan d ard

, we ap p l y t he “ req u i red ev i d en ce” t es t

, wh ich

co n s i d ers wh et h er each s t at u t e req u i res p ro o f o f an ad di t i o n al fact t hat

t h e o t her d o es n o t.

(Ci t at i o n s an d p un c t u a t i o n o m i t t ed .) Ti n s o n v. S ta t e

, 3 3 7 Ga. Ap p

. 8 3

, 8 6 (2 ) (7 8 5

SE2 d 9 1 4 ) (2 0 1 6 ); s ee al s o D r i n ka r d v. W a l ker

, 2 8 1 Ga. 21 1

, 2 1 4 -2 1 7 (6 3 6 SE2 d

5 3 0 ) (2 0 0 6 ). “ Th e ‘ req u i red ev i d en ce’ t es t ap pl i es s t ri ct l y wi t h in t h e co n t ex t o f

d e t e r m i n i n g wh et h er m

ul ti p l e co n v i ct i o n s are p recl u d ed b ecau s e o n e o f t h e cri m e s

was ‘ es t ab l i s h ed b y p ro o f o f t h e s am e o r l es s th an al l t h e fact s ’ t h at were req u i red to

es t ab l i s h t h e o t h er cri m e u n d er OCGA § 1 6 -1 -6 (1 ).” Led f o r d v. S t a te

, 28 9 Ga. 7 0

, 7 3

24(1 ) (7 0 9 SE2 d 2 39 ) (2 01 1 ), o verru l ed o n ot h er g ro u n d s by W i l l i s v. S t at e

, 3 0 4 Ga.

6 8 6 , 7 0 6 , n .3 (8 20 SE2 d 6 4 0 ) (2 0 1 8 ).

To co n v i ct Ham

b ri ck of rap e, as ch arg ed i n t h e i n d i ct m en t

, t h e S t at e h ad to

p ro v e t h at h e “ h as carn al k n o wl ed g e o f: [a] fem al e wh o i s l es s th an ten y ears o f ag e.

Carn al k n o wl ed g e in r a p e o ccu rs wh en t h ere i s an y p en et rat i o n o f t he fem al e s ex

o rg an b y t h e m al e s ex o rg an .” OCGA § 1 6 -6 -1 (a) (2 ).

To co n v i ct Ham

b ri ck o f cru el t y

t o ch il d ren , as ch arg ed i n t h e i n di ct m en t , t h e

St at e had t o p ro v e th at h e “ m al i ci o u sl y cau s e[d ] a ch i l d u n der t h e ag e o f 1 8 cru el o r

ex ces s i v e p h y s i cal o r m en t al p ai n ” b y h av i ng s ex u al i nt erc o u rs e wi t h h er. OCGA

§ 1 6 -5 -7 0 (b ). T o p ro v e th i s co u n t

, t h e St at e pres en t ed ev id en ce th at Ham b ri ck u s ed

t ap e to s i l en ce D. H. w h en sh e cri ed d u ri n g t h e ab u s e, an d t hat h e cau s ed i n ju ry an d

s carri n g t o h er an us t h at m ad e g o i n g t o t h e b at h ro o m p ai nfu l

.

Up o n rev i ew, w e co n cl u d e t h at t h e tri al co u rt pro p erl y d ecl in ed to m erg e t h es e

t wo o ffen s es

. See Pen d l ey v. S ta t e

, 3 0 8 Ga. Ap p

. 8 2 1, 8 2 6 (4 ) (7 0 9 SE2 d 18 ) (2 0 1 1 )

(u n d er req u i red ev i d en ce t es t

, rap e co n v i ct io n d i d n ot m erg e i n t o cru el t y t o ch i l d ren

co n vi ct i o n b ecau s e each req u i red ev i d en ce o f a fact t h e o t h er d i d n ot ); Cu r r i n g t o n v.

S t a t e

, 27 0 Ga. A p p. 3 8 1

, 3 8 5 (2 ) (6 0 6 SE2 d 61 9 ) (2 0 0 4 ) (cru el t y t o ch i l d co n v i ct i o n

an d rap e co n v i ct io n di d n o t m erg e as a m at t er o f fact ); Ra n a ll i v. S t a t e

, 1 9 7 Ga. Ap p.

253 6 0

, 3 6 3 -3 6 4 (2 ) (b ) (3 9 8 SE2 d 4 20 ) (1 9 9 0) (l es ser offen s e o f cru el ty t o c h i l d ren

b as ed o n rap e d i d n o t m erg e in t o g reat er o ff en s e o f rap e b ecau se th e el em en ts o f

ex ces s i v e p h y s i cal an d m en t al p ai n were n ot el em en t s o f rap e). 1 0

M o reo v er, t h ere was t es t i m o n y t h at Ham b ri ck ab u s ed D. H. o n m o re t h an o n e

o ccas i o n

, an d t h u s t he ju ry co u l d h av e fo u n d t h at t he t wo c o u n t s were b as ed o n

s ep arat e i n st an ces

. A s su ch

, t he t wo ch arg es wo ul d n o t m erg e. See Jo n es v. S t a t e

, 3 3 5

Ga. Ap p . 5 9 1 , 5 9 6-5 97 (2 ) (7 8 2 SE2 d 4 8 9 ) (2 0 1 6).

7

. Fi n al ly

, Ham

b ri ck u rg es t h i s Co u rt t o rem an d fo r res en t en ci n g b ecau s e t h e

t ri al co u rt ’ s o ral p ro n o u ncem en t co n fl i ct s wi t h i t s wri t t en sen t en ci ng o rd er i n t h at i t

i m p o s ed a s p l i t sen ten ce on l y on t h e i n ces t c o u n t

. T h e S tat e co n ced es t h at t h e t ri al

co u rt erred i n cal cu l at i ng t h e t o t al s en t en ce, as i t s h o u l d read 2 1 9 y ears to s erv e wi th

l i fe o n p ro bat i o n

.

W h e n t h e t ri al co u rt res en t en ced Ham b ri ck to i n cl u de a s p l i t s en t en ce as

req u i red u n d er OCGA § 1 7 -1 0 -6 .2

, t h e s en t en ce i m p o s ed was 2 1 9 y ears ’

i m p ri s o n m en t wi t h l i fe o n p ro b at i o n

. T h e wri tt en ju d g m en t i n di cat ed th at Ham b ri ck

was s en t en ced t o 2 20 y ears t o s erv e.

1 0 A l t h o u g h t h e d eci s i o n s i n Cu r r i ng t o n an d Ra n a l l i pre-d at e t h e Dr i n ka r d

s t an d ard

, t h e res u l t wo u ld b e t he s am e b ecau se, i n each cas e, t here were el em en t s o f

t h e cri m es t h at d i d n o t o v erl ap

.

26As t he St at e co n ced es

, t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s wri t t en ord er i n co rrect l y i d en ti fi es t h e

t o t a l s en t en ce i m

po s ed

. Acco rd i n g l y

, we rem an d t h e s en t en ce fo r t h e t ri al co u rt t o

co rrect t h i s s cri v en er’ s erro r.

Fo r t h e fo reg oi n g reas o n s

, we affi rm t h e d en ial o f Ham b ri ck ’ s m o t i on fo r n ew

t ri al , b u t rem an d t he s en t en ce t o co rrect a s cri v en er’ s erro r.

Ju d g men t a f f i r med in p a r t a n d ca s e r ema n d e d i n p a r t

. Do yl e, P. J., a n d

Co o mer , J., co n cu r

.

27