THI RD DI VI SI ON

M C FA DDEN, C. J.

, D OYLE, P. J.

, and HODGES, J.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

https ://w w w

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

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

H I S

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

TH E TIM E S S E T B Y

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

.

Febr uar y 1, 2021



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A2 0 A2 00 9 . VAZQUEZ v . THE STATE.

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

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

, t h e Su p eri o r Co u rt o f J o n es Co un t y en t ered a ju d g m en t

o f co n v ict i o n ag ai n s t An t o n io Vazq u ez, Jr. o n t wo c o u n t s o f ag g rav at ed s o d o m y

(OCGA § 1 6 -6 -2 (a) (2 )), t h ree co u n ts o f ag grav at ed ch i l d m o l es t at i on (OCGA § 1 6

-

6 -4 (c)) (2 0 0 8 ), t w o co u nt s o f ch i l d m o l es t at i o n (OCGA § 1 6 -6 -4 (a)) (2 0 08 ), an d t wo

co u nt s o f en ti ci n g a ch il d f o r i n d ecen t p u rp o ses (OCGA § 1 6 -6 -5 (a)). Vazq uez

ap p eal s fro m t h e den i al o f h i s m o t i o n fo r n ew tri al

, arg u i n g t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred

i n : (1 ) i m p ro p erl y referen ci n g Vazq u ez’ s ap p el l at e ri g h t s ; an d (2 ) d en y i n g Vazq u ez’ s

m o ti o n fo r a m i s t ri al aft er an ex p ert wi t n es s t es t i fi ed t o t h e u l t i m at e i s su e i n t h e cas e

an d i n vad ed t h e p ro v in ce o f t h e ju ry . Fi n d i n g n o erro r, we affi rm

.Vi ewed i n a li g h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e verd i ct

, 1 t h e ev i d en ce rev eal ed t h at t h e

v i ct i m li v ed in a d u pl ex i n G ray

, J on es Co u n t y, wi t h h er m o t h er, y ou n g er s i s t er,

y o u n g er b ro t h er, an d Vazq u ez. W h en s h e was s i x y ears ol d

, Vazq uez t o o k t h e v i ct i m

i n t o h i s b ed ro o m an d fo rced h er t o perfo rm o ral s ex on h i m u nt i l h e ejacu lat ed i n h er

m o ut h

. On an o t h er o ccas i o n

, Vazq uez wen t i n t o t he v i ct im ’ s b ed ro o m aft er s h e wen t

t o b ed

, w h ere s h e ag ai n perfo rm ed o ral s ex o n h im

. Th en

, d u ri n g t h e s am e i n ci d en t

,

Vazq u ez an al l y s o d o m i zed t h e v i ct i m an d, d es p i t e t h e v i ct i m ’ s p l eas fo r h i m t o s t o p

b ecau s e “ t h at h u rt s

, ” 2 co n t i n u ed u n t i l h e e j a c u l at ed

. 3 Th e v i ct i m al s o reco u n t ed an

ev en t i n Vazq uez’ s b at h ro o m d u ri n g wh i ch s h e lean ed o v er Vazq u ez’ s s i n k wh i l e h e

1 See, e.g

., Pi ckl es i mer v. S t a t e

, 3 5 3 Ga. Ap p

. 7 1 8 (8 3 9 SE2 d 2 1 4 ) (2 0 2 0 ); s ee

al s o G a t h er

s v. S ta te

, 3 5 5 Ga. A p p

. 7 6 1

, 7 6 3 (1 ) (8 4 4 SE2 d 8 8 2 ) (2 02 0 ) (“ [I] t i s t h e

ju ry ’ s ro l e t o res ol v e co nfl ict s i n th e ev i d en ce an d d et erm i ne th e cred i b i l i t y o f

wi t n es s es

, an d t h e p res en ce o f s u c h c o nfl i ct s d o es n o t ren d er t h e ev i d en ce

i n s u ffi ci en t .”) (ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed ).

2 A t s o m e p o i n t

, a fam i ly fri en d an d t h e v i c t i m ’ s m o th er’ s n i ece, wh o wo u ld

s o m et i m es s p en d t h e n i g h t wi t h t h e v i ct i m ’ s fam i l y

, h eard t h e v i ct im cry fro m h er

b ed ro o m

, “ Dad d y

, p l eas e do n ’ t

, t h at

. . . hu rt s

. St o p .” T h e n i e c e al s o h eard t h e

v i ct i m ’ s b ed “ s q ueak i n g ” d u ri n g t h e in ci d en t

. Th e p ai r b ecam e fri g h t en ed an d l eft t h e

d u p l ex t o cal l t h e v ict i m ’ s m ot her fro m a n earb y W affl e Ho u s e, bu t t h e m o t h er, wh o

was at wo rk , d id n o t ret u rn t o t h e d u p l ex t h at ev en i n g

.

3 Th e v i ct i m ’ s s is t er, wh o s h ared a b ed ro om wi th t h e v ict i m

, w i t n e s s e d t h i s

i n s t an ce o f Vazq u ez’ s ab u s e. Du ri n g t ri al

, t h e vi ct i m ’ s s i s t er u s ed a n a t o m i cal d o l l s

t o d em o n s t rat e wh at s h e s aw, i n cl u d i n g t h e v i ct i m p erfo rm i n g o ral s ex on Vazq u ez.

2an al l y s o d o m i zed h er. W h en t h e v i ct i m res i st ed

, Vazq u ez wo u l d s t ri ke h er on h er h i p.

T h e v i ct i m s t at ed t h at s u ch ab us e o ccu rred “ a l o t ,” b u t t h at i t on l y o ccu rred wh e n

Vazq u ez h ad b een d ri n k i n g

.

Th e vi ct i m al s o d es cri b ed occas i o n s o n w h i ch Vazq u ez s h o wed h er

p o rn og rap hi c m o vi es d ep i ct in g a n u d e b o y an d g irl en g ag ed i n t h e s am e “ [b ] ad

t h i n g s ” Vazq u ez “ d i d t o [h er] .” As t he v i d eo s p l ay ed

, Vazq uez ab u s ed t h e v i ct i m in

t h e s a m e m an n er as “ t h ey were d o i n g o n TV[,] ” wh ich i n cl u d ed an al an d o r a l

s o d o m y

.

Th e v i c t i m d i d n o t i ni t i al l y d i s cl o s e Vazq uez’ s ab u s e b ecau s e Vazq uez

t h reat en ed t o h u rt h er m o t h er, an d t h e v i ct i m b el i ev ed h im

. Ul t i m at el y

, h o we v e r

,

wh i le at t en d in g a s u m

m er cam p i n M aco n

, t h e v ict i m d i s cl o sed Vazq u ez’ s ab u s e to

o t h e r c a m

p e r s b ecau s e s h e “

ju s t need ed so m eb o d y t o t al k t o ”; t h e cam p ers t h en

rep o rt ed t h e ab u s e t o cam p co u ns el o rs

, wh o al ert ed J o nes Co u n t y l aw en fo rcem en t

. 4

A J o n es Co u n t y g ran d ju ry i n d i ct ed Vazq u ez fo r t wo co u n t s o f ag g rav at ed

s o d o m y

, t hree co u n t s o f ag g rav at ed ch i ld m o l e s t at i o n

, t wo co un t s o f ch i ld

m o les t at i o n

, an d t wo co u n t s o f en t i ci n g a c h i l d fo r i n d ecen t p u rp o s es

. At t ri al

,

4 Th e v i ct im al s o p art i ci p at ed i n a fo ren s i c p h y s i cal ex am i nat i o n, wh i ch d i d n ot

rev eal an y s ig n s o f p hy s ical t rau m a, an d a fo ren si c i n t erv i ew.

3Vazq u ez d en i ed t o u ch i n g th e v ict i m an d t es ti fi ed t hat t h e al l eg at i o n s were p art o f t h e

v i ct i m ’ s m o t h er’ s s ch em e t o h av e h i m arres t ed an d jai l ed fo ll o wi n g a fi g h t b et ween

t h e t wo

. To th at en d

, Vazq u e z ’s m ot h er tes t i fi ed th at h i s arres t occu rred o n e week

aft er s h e rep o rt ed th e v i ct i m ’ s m ot h er t o t he Dep art m en t o f Fa m i l y an d Ch i l d ren

Serv i ces f or susp ect ed p h y s ical ab u s e o f t h e v i ct i m ’ s y o u n ger s i s t er. Nev ert h el es s

, t h e

ju ry ret u rn ed g u i l ty v erd i ct s ag ai n s t Vazq u ez o n each co u n t o f t h e i n d i ct m en t

, an d t h e

t ri al co u rt d en i ed Vazq u ez’ s m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al

. 5 Th i s ap peal fo l l owed

.

1

. In h i s fi rs t en u m erat i o n o f erro r, Vazq u ez co nt en d s t h at t h e t ri al co urt m ad e

an i m p ro p er referen ce t o h is ap p el l at e ri g h t s d u ri n g i t s i nt ro d uct o ry s t at em en t s t o t h e

ju ry v en i re. See OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 7 (a). W e fi n d n o p l ai n erro r.

A s p a r t o f i t s o ri en t at i o n o f t h e ju ry v en ire, t he t ri al co u rt warn ed t h o s e

as s em b l ed t o

n o t i n dep en d en t l y in v es t i g at e an y fact s o r v is it an y scen es dep i ct ed i n

t h e ev i d en ce. W e h ad a t ri al u p i n Mo rg an Co un t y i n wh i ch i t wen t o n

fo r fo u r d ay s an d i t was v ery i m p ort an t ab o u t wh at co ul d o r co u l d n o t be

s een u n d er a p art i cu lar s t reet l am p

. A n d wh en we were i n [t h e]

d el i b erat i o n s t ag e, o n e of t h e ju ro rs wen t ou t an d lo o k ed un d er t h e s treet

l am p

, th e y ou n g m an cam e b ack an d t ri ed to t el l t h e o t h er ju ro rs wh at he

t h o u g ht co ul d o r co u ld n o t b e seen

. Th e o th er ju ro rs k n ew h e w a s

5 Vazq u ez d o es n ot co nt es t t h e s u ffi ci en cy o f t h e ev i d en ce.

4v i o l at i n g h i s o at h

, t o ld m e ab o u t i t an d s o we h ad t o h av e [a h e a r i n g ]

.

Bu t t h at t i m e h e g ot t ak en o ff. . . .

An d

, o f co u rs e, wh en i t wen t u p o n a p p ea l

, t he [a p pel l a t e] [ c] o u r t h a d

t o go o ver i t wi t h a f

i n e t o o t h co mb t o see wh a t t h ey t h ou g ht a b o u t i t

. So

i t pu t s ev ery t h i n g at ri s k wh en t h at k i n d o f t h i n g i s b ei n g d o n e.

(Em p h as i s s u p p li ed .) Vazq u ez d i d n o t o b ject t o t he t ri al co u rt ’ s s t at em en t

.

Th e “ fai lu re t o m ak e a t i m el y o b ject i o n t o an al l eg ed vi o l at i o n o f [OCGA § 1 7

-

8 -5 7 (a) (1 )] s h al l p recl u d e ap p el l at e rev i ew, un l es s su ch v i o l at i o n co n s t it u t es p l ai n

erro r wh i ch affect s s u b s t an ti v e ri g ht s o f t h e p art ies .” 6 OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 7 (b ).

To es t ab l is h p l ai n erro r, [Vazq u ez] m u st p o in t t o a l eg al erro r t h at was

n o t affi rm at i v el y wai v ed

, w as cl ear an d o b v io us bey o n d reas o n ab l e

d i s p u t e, a f

f e c t e d hi s s u b s t an ti al ri g h t s

, an d s eri ou s ly affect ed th e

fai rn es s , i n t eg ri ty , o r p u b l i c rep u t at i o n o f ju d i ci al p ro ceed i n g s

.

(Ci t at i o n o m i t t ed

. ) Ba mb er g v. S t a t e , 3 0 8 Ga. 3 40 , 3 52 (5 ) (8 3 9 SE2 d 6 4 0 ) (2 0 2 0 );

s ee g en eral l y S t a t e v. Kel ly , 2 9 0 Ga. 2 9

, 3 3 (2 ) (a) (7 1 8 SE2 d 2 3 2 ) (2 0 11 ) (t o s h o w

6 Al t ho u g h Vazq u ez’ s t ri al o ccu rred p ri o r t o t h e en act m en t o f OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 7

i n i t s cu rren t fo rm

, we r e v i e w h i s cl ai m u n d er o u r cu rren t p l ai n erro r an al y s i s

. See

W i l l is v. S t a t e

, 3 0 4 Ga. 1 2 2

, 1 2 9 (2 ) (b ) (8 1 6 SE2 d 6 5 6 ) (2 0 1 8 ) (“ [B] ecau s e

s u b s ect i o n (b ) o f OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 7 i s n o t ai m ed at reg u l at i n g an y co n d u ct at t ri al

, b ut

i n s t ead ad d res ses t h e s tan d a r d o f ap p el l at e rev i ew o f an erro r al read y m ad e at t ri al

,

t h e s t an d ard of ap p el l at e rev i ew s et ou t i n t h at su b sect io n i s p ro p erl y gi v en ret ro act i v e

effect t o cas es t ri ed b efo re t h e en act m en t d at e b u t ap peal ed aft er t hat d at e.”).

5p l ai n erro r, “ t h ere m u s t [fi rs t ] be an erro r o r d efect

— s o m e s o rt o f d ev i at i o n fro m a

l eg al ru le

— t h at h as n o t b een i n t en t i o n al l y rel i n q ui s h ed o r ab an d o ned ”) (ci t at i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ). T o su cceed o n a cl ai m o f p l ai n erro r, a p art y m us t sat i s fy each

o f t h e fo u r p ro n g s o f t h e s t an dard . See Kel ly

, 2 9 0 Ga. at 3 3 (2 ) (a).

Here, we fi nd n o p l ai n erro r b ecau s e Vazq u e z h as n o t d em on s trat ed an erro r

o r d e f e c t b y t h e t ri al co u rt t h at i s “ cl ear an d o b v io u s b ey o n d reas o n ab l e d i sp u t e[.] ”

Ba mb er g

, 3 0 8 Ga. at 35 2 (5 ). As a g en eral m at t er, “ [i ] t i s erro r fo r a t ri al ju d g e i n an y

cri m i n al c a s e t o ex p res s o r i n t i m at e an o p i n i o n as t o t h e g u i l t o f t h e accu s ed .”

DeLo a ch v. S t at e

, 3 0 8 G a. 2 8 3 , 2 9 0 (2 ) (b ) (8 4 0 SE2 d 39 6 ) (2 0 2 0 ); s ee al s o OCGA

§ 1 7 -8 -5 7 (a) (1 ). In d eed

, “ [a] t ri al j u d ge’ s c o m m e n t co n cern in g th e p ro ces s o r

av ai l ab i li t y o f ap p el l at e rev iew i n t h e cas e m ay ru n afo u l o f t h i s ru le i f t h e ju ry m ay

i n fer fro m th e co m

m en t th at t h e ju d g e h o l d s an op i n i o n ab o u t t h e defen d an t ’ s g u i l t .”

D e L o a c h

, 3 0 8 Ga. at 2 9 0 (2 ) (b ). “ Ho wev er, i t i s n o t erro r wh en t he t ri al co u rt

referen ces t h e ap p el l at e co u rt s i n a co n t ex t t h at do es n o t i n t i m at e t hat t h e ju dg e h o l d s

an op i n i o n o n t h e d efen d an t’ s g u i l t o r l es s en t he ju ry ’ s res p o ns i b il i t y i n m ak i n g i t s

d eci s i o n .” (Em

p h as i s s u p pl ied .) Id

. at 2 9 0-2 9 1 (2 ) (b ); s ee al s o M i t ch el l v. S t a t e

, 2 9 3

Ga. 1

, 3 ( 3 ) (7 42 SE2 d 45 4 ) (2 0 1 3 ) (“ Mere ab s t ract referen ces t o ap p el lat e co u rt s

,

6wh i ch d o n o t co n v ey t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o p i n i o n

, are n o t n eces s ari l y rev ers i bl e erro r.”)

(ci t at i o n an d p u nct u at io n o m i t ted ).

In t h i s cas e, “ t he t ri al co u rt ’ s s t at em en t s

. . . we r e i n t h e c o n t ex t o f ju ro r

o ri en t at i o n at t h e s t art o f t h e t ri al wh en n o ev i d en ce h ad b een ad d u ced an d o p en i n g

s t at em en t h ad n o t y et been h el d .” S t a te v. Cl emen t s , 2 8 9 Ga. 6 4 0 , 6 48 -6 4 9 (4 ) (7 1 5

SE2 d 5 9 ) (2 01 1 ). N on e of t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s s t at em en ts ev en rem o t el y referen ced

Vazq u ez g en eral l y o r s p eci fi cal l y an d i n cl ud ed n o referen ce t o an y ev i d en ce t h at m ay

b e i n t ro d u ced ag ai n s t Vazq u ez. As a res u l t

, “ [w] h ere, as here,

. . . o ri en t at i on occu rred

b efo re an y ev i d en ce was i n t ro d u ced

, di d no t co n v ey o r i n t im at e an y o p i n io n o f t h e

t ri al j u d ge, n o r l es s en t h e s en s e o f res p o ns i b i l it y o f t h e ju ro rs ,” we co ncl u d e t h at t h e

t ri al co u rt ’ s referen ce t o ap p e l l a t e co u rt s g en eral l y d oes n ot req u i re rev ers al

.

(Ci t at i o n s an d pu n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed

. ) Bea r den v. St a t e

, 1 5 9 Ga. Ap p

. 8 9 2, 8 9 3 (3 ) (2 8 5

SE2 d 6 0 6) (1 9 8 1); s ee al s o Cl emen t s , 2 8 9 Ga. at 6 4 8-6 4 9 (4 ).

2

. N e x t

, V a z q u e z arg u es t h at t h e tri al co u rt erred i n d en y i n g h i s m o t i o n fo r

m i s t ri al aft er an ex p ert wi t n es s t es t i fi ed t o t h e u l t i m at e is s u e i n t h e cas e an d i n v ad ed

t h e p ro v i n ce o f t h e ju ry . Vazq u ez wai v ed ap p el l at e rev i ew o f t h i s i ss u e.

7Du ri n g t he St at e’ s d i rect ex am i n at io n o f Dr. Deb b ie W es t

, a p ed i at ri ci an

q u al i fi ed as an ex p ert wi t n es s i n s ex u al ab u s e fo ren s i c ex am i n at i o ns

, th e fo l l o wi n g

ex ch an g e o ccu rred :

Q: [I] n y o u r ex p eri en ce an d t rai n i n g, i s i t u n u su al fo r y o u t o

fi n d an an u s t h at h as b een p en et rat ed an d t h ere b e n o s i g n s ?

A: Th at ’ s n o rm al

. Th e m ajo ri t y o f t h e t i m e, wh en t h ere’ s b een

an al p en et rat i o n , t h ere are n o fi nd i n g s . An d , p h y s i ol o g y , t h e

reas o n fo r t h at i s b ecau s e t h e an u s i s a ro u n d m u s cl e wh ich

we cal l a s p h i n ct er, o p en s an d cl o s es . . . . An d s o t h ere

real l y h as t o b e a g reat d eal o f t rau m a i n o rd er t o d am ag e

t h at t i s s ue an d t o s car t h at t is s u e. An d , ag ai n, t he m ajo ri t y o f ch i l d ren

wh o h a v e b e e n a n al ly p en et rat ed

, an d t h ere h as b een a co n v i ct i o n i n a

co u rt o f l aw, t h ere are s t i l l n o rm al fi n d i n g s o n an an al ex am

.

Q: W h at ab o u t i n t h o s e cas es —

[DEFENSE COUNSEL] : I’ m go i n g t o o b j ect t o t h at

res p o n s e an d as k t h at i t b e s t ri ck en

, Yo u r Ho no r. I t h i n k i t

rai s es t h e u l t i m at e i s s u e.

Defen s e co u ns el as k ed t o ap p ro ach an d

, in t h e en s u i n g b en ch co nferen ce, m o v ed fo r

a m is t ri al

. Th e St at e arg u ed fo r a cu rat i v e i ns t ru ct i o n i n s t ead

, a n d t h e t ri al co u rt

reces s ed t o al l o w co u n sel fo r b ot h p art i es t o res earch t h e i s s ue. Fo l l o wi n g co n t i n u ed

arg u m en t b y co un sel

, t h e t ri al co u rt ru l ed t h at “ a cu rat i v e in s t ru ct i o n i s far en o u g h in

8t h i s cas e b ecau s e of t h e w ay i t w as d o ne, an d t h e fact i t was n ’ t d o n e wi t h b ad i n t en t .”

Th e t ri al co u r t t h en in v i t ed p ro p o s ed cu rat i v e i n s t ru ct i o n s fro m b o th p art i es

.

Ul t i m at el y

, Vazq u ez’ s co u n s el an d t he St at e ag reed to a p ro po s ed cu rat i v e i ns t ru ct i o n

“ wi t h t h e u n d ers t an d in g t h at i t ’ s n o t wai v i n g t h e o ri g i n al m o t i o n fo r m is t ri al [: ] ”

An y referen ce i n t es ti m o n y b y t h e d o ct o r al l eg ed l y t o o t h e r cri m i nal

cas es

, an d es p eci al l y

al l eg ed co n v ict i o n s , s h o u l d n o t b e co n si dered b y

y o u or t ak e p art i n y ou r d eci s i o n [-] m ak i ng i n reac h i n g a v erd i ct

. An y

t es t i m o n y t o t h at effect i s s t ri ck en an d i t ’ s n o t p art o f t h e ev id en ce.

Un d er G eo rg ia law, “ [w] h et h er t o d ecl are a m i s t ri al i s a q u es ti o n co m m i t t ed to

t h e d i s cret i o n of t h e t ri al ju dg e, an d t h e d en i al o f a m is t ri al i s rev ers i b l e erro r o n l y i f

i t ap p ears t h at a m i s tri al w as es s en t i al t o p res erv e t h e d efen d an t ’ s ri g h t t o a fai r t ri al .”

(Ci t at i o n an d p u n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed .) Ga i n es v. S t a te

, 3 3 9 Ga. A p p

. 5 2 7

, 5 29 (2 ) (7 9 2

SE2 d 4 6 6 ) (2 0 1 6). Ho wev er, i t i s ju st as s et t l ed t hat “ wh ere a defen d an t o b ject s an d

m o ves fo r m is t ri al an d th e t ri al co u rt d en i es t h e m o ti o n b u t t ak es s o m e co rrect i v e

act i on

, i f t h e d efen dan t i s d i s s at i s fi ed wi th t h at act i on , h e m u st ren ew t h e o b

ject i o n

o r m o t io n .” (Ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed

. ) Id .; s ee al s o Red d i n g v. St a t e

, 3 5 4 Ga.

9Ap p . 5 2 5 , 5 3 6 (4 ) (8 4 1 SE2 d 1 9 2 ) (2 0 2 0 ); Pi cka r d v. S t a t e

, 25 7 Ga. Ap p . 6 4 2 , 6 4 4

(2 ) (5 72 SE2 d 6 60 ) (2 0 0 2 ). 7

In t hi s cas e

, d e s p it e hi s i n i t i al m o t io n fo r a m i s t ri al

, Vazq u ez’ s co u n s el

p art i ci p at ed i n d raft i n g t h e cu rat iv e i n st ru ct io n w hi c h t he t ri al co u rt u l t i m at el y

d el i v ered

. Th ereaft er, V azq u ez’ s co un s el d id n o t ren ew h i s m o t i o n fo r a m i s t ri al o r

o b ject to th e t ri al court ’ s cu rat i ve i n s t ru ct i on

. Acco rd i n g l y

, we co n cl u d e t hat Vazq uez

h as wai v ed an y ap p el l at e rev i ew o f t h i s arg um en t. See Red d i n g

, 3 5 4 Ga. Ap p

. at 5 3 6

(4 ) (fi n d i n g d efen dan t wai v ed ap p el l at e rev i ew wh en h e fai l ed t o “ o b ject aft er t h e t ri al

7 Vazq u ez i s n o t res cu ed b y cert ai n s t at em en t s by h i s co un s el at t ri al

. Aft er

Vazq u ez’ s co u n s el ag reed t o t h e co n t en t o f t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s cu rat i v e i n s t r u c t i o n,

co u ns el ad d ed t hat

i n rev i ewi n g t h e ap pel l at e cas es i n s i t u at i o n s of t h i s s o rt wh ere defen s e

as s en t s t o cu rat i ve in st ru ct i o n s t h at m ay o r m ay n o t b e l eg al ly s u ffi ci en t

,

t h ey ’ re d eem ed t o wai v e an y is s u e rel at ed to t h a t c u r at i v e i n s t ru ct i o n

.

An d g i v en t h e s u rp ri s e an d th e g rav it y o f t h e s i tu at io n

, I g l ad l y

p art i ci pat e i n res o lv i n g i t wi th t h e cu rat i v e i n s tru ct i on

, b ut do n ’ t b el iev e

I can et h ical l y wai v e an y o b ject i o n t h at I m i g h t h av e t o t h e t es t i m o n y b y

d o i n g s o

.

Al t h o u g h t h e t ri al co urt st at ed

, “ [t ] h at ’ s fai r[,] ” we are n o t b o u n d b y t h e t ri al co urt ’ s

s t at em en t

. Cf. Mu r r a

y v. Ri ch a r d

s o n

, 1 34 Ga. Ap p

. 67 6

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

(1 9 7 5) (“ W h et h er an ap p eal i s p ro p erl y b efo re t h e co u rt i s a q u es t i on o f l aw fo r t h e

co u rt .”).

10co u rt g av e t h e cu rat iv e i n s t ru ct i o n

, wh i ch h e s p eci fi cal ly as k ed t h e tri al co u rt to

g i v e”); Pi cka rd

, 2 5 7 Ga. Ap p

. at 6 4 4 (2 ) (h ol d i n g defen d an t wai v ed ap p el l at e rev i ew

b e c a u s e he “ p art i ci p at ed i n th e fo rm u l at io n of [a cu rat i v e] i ns t ru ct i o n an d n ei t h er

m a d e o b je c t i o n t o t h e i n s t ru ct i o n aft er it was g i v en n o r ren ewed h is m o t i o n fo r a

m i s t ri al ”).

In s um

, we co n cl u d e th at Vazq u ez h as fai l e d t o d em o n st rat e p l ai n erro r

as s o ci at ed wi t h t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s ju ry o ri en t at i o n s t at e m en t s co n cern i n g ap p el l at e

rev i ew. Fu rt h erm o re, we co n cl u d e t h at Vazq u ez wai v ed an y erro r rel at ed t o t h e ex p ert

wi t n es s ’ t es t i m o n y b y fai l i n g t o ren ew hi s m o ti o n fo r m i s t ri al o r o b j ect t o a cu rat i v e

i n s t ru ct i o n aft er t he t ri al co u rt g av e t h e i n s t ru ct i o n t o t h e ju ry

. Th erefo re, we affi rm

t h e t ri al co urt ’ s o rd er d en y i n g Vazq u ez’ s m o ti o n fo r n ew t ri al

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . McFa d

d en , C. J., a nd

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

.

11