SECOND DI VI SI ON

M I LLER, P. J.

, RI C K M A N and REESE, 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

M ar ch 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 09 1 . DANM OND SLACK v . THE STATE.

R E E S E

, J u d g e.

Dan m on d Sl ack ap p eal s fro m an o rd er o f t h e Su p eri o r Co u rt of Fu l t o n Co u n t y

,

wh i ch d en i ed h i s am en ded m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al aft er a ju ry fo u n d h i m g u i l t y o f

ag g r a v a t ed ch i l d m o les tat i o n

, ch il d m o l es tat i on

, an d cru el t y t o ch i l d ren i n t h e fi rs t

d e gree. 1 Sl ack arg u es t h at t h e t ri al co u rt ab u s ed i t s di s cret io n in d is al l o wi n g a

p ro p os ed v o i r d i re q u es t i o n an d t h at h i s t r i a l c ou n s el was i n effect i v e fo r fai l i n g to

o b j ect t o ch i l d h ears ay an d i n fai l i n g t o req u es t a j u ry in s t ru ct i o n on t h e s t at u t e o f

l i m i tat i on wi t h res p ect t o t h e ch i l d -cru el t y ch arg e. Fo r t h e reas on s set fo rt h in fra, we

affi rm Sl ack ’ s co nv i ct i on s fo r ag g rav at ed ch id m o les t at io n an d ch i l d m o l es t at i o n,

1 See OCGA § § 1 6 -6 -4 (c); 1 6 -6 -4 (a) (1 ); 1 6 -5 -7 0 (b ).rev ers e h i s co n v i ct i o n fo r fi rs t -d eg ree cru el ty t o ch i l d ren

, an d rem an d t h e cas e wi th

d i rect i o n

.

Vi ewed i n t h e l ig h t m o s t f a v o r ab l e t o t h e v erd i ct

, 2 th e ev i d en ce s h o ws t h e

fo l l o w i n g fact s

. Th e v i ct im (“ V. S.”) was al m o s t fo ur y ears o l d wh en her m o t h er

m arri ed Sl ack i n 1 9 9 9

. Fro m 20 0 1 u n t i l t h ey s ep arat ed i n Decem ber 2 0 0 3

, t h e co u p l e

l i ved i n an ap art m en t i n Al p h aret t a w i t h V

. S

. an d t wo ch i l dren t he co u p l e h ad

t o g e t h e r

. Du ri n g t h is t i m e p eri o d

, Sl ack w as al o n e w i t h V

. S. i n th e aft ern o o n aft er

s h e g ot h o m e fro m

s ch o o l.

V. S. was 1 7 y ears ol d at t h e t i m e o f t he t ri al i n 2 0 1 3 . Sh e t es t i fi ed t h at , o nce

o r t wi ce a week i n 2 0 0 2 an d 2 0 0 3 (wh en s he was s ev en o r ei g h t y ear s o l d )

, S l ack

w o u l d r u b h e r ch es t an d fo rce h er t o p erfo rm o ral s ex o n hi m

. On o n e o ccas i o n

, h e

u n s u cces s fu l l y t ri ed to “ s t i ck h i s p en i s i n [h er] v ag i na[.] ” V. S. fu rt h er t es t i fi ed t h at

Sl ack wo u l d h av e h er tak e o ff h er cl o t h es an d g et o n t h e b ed an d wo ul d t h en v i d eo

reco rd h er wi t h h er l eg s s p read o p en

.

V. S. t es t i fi ed t h at Sl ack t o l d h er n o t t o t el l an y o n e an d t hat i t was t h ei r “ l i t t l e

s ecret [.] ” W hen s h e go t ol d er an d real i zed t h e ab u s e was n o t n orm al

, s h e co n fi d ed in

h er g ran d m o t h er. Th e g ran d m o t h er t es t i fi ed t h at t he o u t cry o ccu rred i n Jan u ary 2 0 1 2

2 See Ba t t en v. S t a t e , 2 9 5 Ga. 4 4 2 , 4 4 3 (1 ) (7 6 1 SE2 d 7 0 ) (2 0 14 ).

2aft er V. S. h ad s pen t t h e week en d wi t h h er. Acco rd i n g t o t he g ran d m o t h er, V

. S. s ai d

t h at Sl ack h ad to u ch ed h er an d t h at “ h e co u l d n’ t p en et rat e h er s o h e wo u l d m ak e h er

h av e o ral s ex .”

Th e g ran d m o t h er t o l d V

. S.’ s fat h e r

, wh o t es t i fi ed t h at he t al k ed t o V. S. t h e

fo l l o wi n g d a y an d th en co n t act ed t h e p o l i ce. Ro swel l Po li ce Dep art m en t Det ect i v e

J en n ifer Ben net t t es t i fi ed t hat s h e wat ch ed a l i v e feed o f a fo r e n s i c i n terv iew wi th

V. S. an d t h en o b tai n ed an arres t warran t fo r Sl ack

.

Sl ack was i n d i ct ed in J ul y 2 0 1 3, an d t ri ed an d fo u nd g u i l t y th e fo l l o wi n g

m onth. Th e t ri al co u rt s en t en ced Sl ack t o 3 0 y ears ’ i m p ri s o nm en t fo r ag g rav at ed ch i ld

m o les t at i o n (Co u nt 1 ), 2 0 y ears ’ i m p ri s o n m en t fo r ch i d m o l es t at i o n (Co u n t 2

, t o ru n

c o n s e c ut i v el y to Co un t 1 ), an d 2 0 y ears (t o s erv e 1 0 ) o n t h e ch i ld cru el ty ch a r g e

( C o u n t 3

, t o ru n co n s ecu ti v el y t o Co u n t 2 ). Aft er a h eari n g, t h e tri al co urt d en i e d

Sl ack ’ s am en d ed m o t i on fo r a n ew t ri al . Th i s ap p eal fo l l o w ed

.

“ T h e co n d u ct o f v o i r d i re i s wi t hi n t h e di s cret io n o f t h e t ri al co u rt

, a n d [ i t s ]

ru l i n gs are p ro per ab s en t s om e m an i fes t ab u se o f h i s di scret io n .” 3 “ In rev iewi n g a t ri al

co u rt ’ s d et erm i n at i on reg ard i n g a cl ai m o f i n effect i v e as s i s t an ce o f co u n s el

, t h i s co u rt

3 Meeks v. S ta t e

, 2 6 9 Ga. Ap p

. 83 6 -8 3 7 (1 ) (6 0 5 SE2 d 4 2 8 ) (2 0 04 ) (ci tat i o n an d

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

3u p h o l d s th e tri al co u rt ’ s fact u al fi n d i n g s u n l es s th ey are cl earl y erro n eo u s ; we rev i ew

t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s l eg al co n cl us i on s d e n o v o

. ” 4 W i t h t h es e gu i di n g p ri n ci p les i n m i n d,

we t u rn n o w t o Sl ack ’ s cl ai m s o f erro r.

1

. Sl ack arg u es t h at t he t ri al co urt ab u s ed i ts d i s cret i o n i n d i s al l o wi n g h i s

p ro p os ed g en eral v o i r d ire q u es t i o n 3 1

.

Sl ack p ro p o s ed

, in ter al i a, t he fo l l o wi n g t wo gen eral q u es t i o n s : “ 3 0. Wo u ld

an y o n e h ere b e s h ock ed to h ear a ch i l d u n d er t h e ag e o f 18 d es cri b e a s ex u al act ? 3 1.

W o u l d an y o n e au to m at i cal l y b el i ev e a y ou n g ch i l d wh o co u l d d es cri be s u ch act s ? ”

Th e tri al co u rt al l o wed Sl ack ’ s at to rn ey t o as k p ro sp ect i v e ju ro rs q u es t io n 3 0

, b ut

d i s al lo wed q u es t i on 3 1.

W h i l e tri al ju dg es h av e d i s cret i o n t o o v ers ee ju ry se le c tion, “ the S upr e m e Co u rt

o f t h e U n i t ed St at es h as hel d t h at d u e p ro ces s req u ires t h at vo i r d i re b e s uffi ci en t to

al l o w t h e p art i es an d t h e t ri al co u rt t o el i ci t ju ro r b i as .” 5 “ O CGA § 1 5 -1 2 -1 3 3 al l o ws

4 W r i g h t v. S t a t e

, 3 19 Ga. Ap p . 7 2 3 , 7 3 6 (5 ) (7 3 8 SE2 d 3 1 0 ) (2 0 1 3 ).

5 El li n g t o n v. S t a te

, 2 92 Ga. 1 09

, 1 2 4 (7 ) (b ) (7 3 5 S E 2 d 7 3 6 ) (2 0 1 2 ),

d i s ap p ro v ed i n p art o n o t h er g ro u n d s b y W il l i s v. St a t e

, 30 4 G a. 6 86

, 7 0 6 (1 1 ) (a), n.

3 (8 2 0 SE2 d 6 4 0) (2 01 8 ).

4v o i r d i re q u es t i o n s b ey on d th os e t h at t h e Co n st it u t i o n wo u l d req u i re al l o wi n g .” 6 T h at

s t at u te p ro v i d es i n p art :

In al l cri m i n al cas es

, b o th t h e s t at e an d t h e accu s ed s hal l h av e t h e ri g h t

t o an i n d i v i d u al ex am i n at i o n o f each p ro s pect i v e ju ro r fro m wh i ch th e

j u r y i s t o be s el ect ed p ri o r t o i n t erp o s in g a ch al l en g e.

. . . I n t h e

ex am i n at i o n, t h e co u n s el fo r ei t h er p art y s h al l h av e t h e ri g h t t o i n q u i re

o f t h e i n d iv i d u al p ro s pect i v e ju ro rs ex am i ned t ou c h i n g an y m at t er o r

t h i n g wh i ch w o ul d i l lu s trat e an y i n t eres t of t h e p ro sp ect i v e ju ro r i n th e

cas e, in cl u d i n g an y op i n i o n as t o wh i ch p art y o u g h t t o p r e v ai l

, th e

rel at io ns h ip o r acq u ai n t an ce o f t h e p ro s p ect i v e ju ro r wi t h t h e p art i es o r

co u n s el t h erefo r, an y fact o r ci rcu m st an ce i n d i cat i n g an y i n cl i n at i o n

,

l ean in g

, o r b ias w h ich t he p ro s pect i v e ju ro r m i g h t hav e res p ect i n g th e

s u b ject m at t er o f th e act i o n o r t h e co u n sel o r p art i es t h ere t o

, a n d t h e

rel i g i o us , s o ci al

, an d frat ern al co n n ect i on s o f t h e p ro s p ect i v e ju ro r.

As t h e rev i ewi n g co urt

, we g i ve s u bs t an ti al d eferen ce to th e deci s i o n s m ad e by

t ri al ju d g es

, i n p art becau s e “ t h e l i n e b et ween p erm i s s i b l e i n q u i ry i n t o ‘ p reju d i ce’ (a

ju ro r’ s fi x ed o p i n i o n t h at a cert ai n res u l t s h o u l d au t o m at i cal l y fo ll o w fro m s o m e fact

,

reg ard l es s o f o th er f

a c t s o r l eg al i ns t ru ct i o n s) an d i m p erm i s s ib l e q u es t i o n s o f

‘ pre-ju d g m en t ’ (s p ecu lat i o n ab o u t o r co m m i t m en t t o t h e ap pro p ri at e res ul t bas ed o n

h y p o t h es i zed fact s ) can b e h azy .” 7

6 El l i n g to n , 2 9 2 Ga. at 1 2 5 (7 ) (b ).

7 Th o ma s v. S t a t e , 2 9 6 Ga. 4 8 5 , 4 89 -4 9 0 (2 ) (7 6 9 SE2 d 8 2 ) (2 0 1 5 ).

5In t hi s cas e, aft er ad m i n i s t eri n g t h e v o i r d i re o a t h

, t h e t ri al co u rt as k ed

q u es ti o n s t o i d en t ify an y p ro sp ect i v e ju ro rs wh o h ad “ an y p reju d i ce o r b i as ” ag ai n s t

Sl ack ; wh o s e m in d s w e r e no t “ p erfect l y i m p art i al b et ween t he St at e an d [Sl ack ] ”;

wh o h ad a fri en d o r f

a m i l y m e m

b er o r k n ew a ch il d wh o h ad b een t h e v i ct i m o f

s ex u al as s au l t ; wh o h ad co u n s el ed v i ct i m s o f s ex ual ab u s e o r had s o m eo n e co n fi d e

i n t h em t h at t h e p ers o n was t h e v i ct i m o f a s ex ual as sau l t ; o r wh o h ad wo rk ed wi th

ch i l d ren i n an y

cap aci t y

.

Th e co u rt al s o ex p l ai n ed at l en g t h t h e n eed fo r ju ro rs t o be ab l e t o s et as i d e an y

“ p reco n cei v ed n o t i o n [s ] ” an d fo r t h e p art i es t o d is co v er an y “ i n cl i nat i on

, lean i n g o r

b i as t hat an i n d i v i d ual ju ro r h as co n cern in g t h e s ub ject o f th e cas e

, c o u n s el o r t h e

p art i es [.] ” Th e co u rt i n q u i red as t o wh et h er an y ju ro rs fel t t h at t hey co ul d n o t d o t h es e

t h i n g s

. At o n e po i n t d u ri n g t h e in d i v i d u a l q u e s t i o n i n g

, t h e co urt rem i n d ed t h e

p ro s p ect i v e ju ro rs t hat t h e q u es t i o n s were “ d es i g n ed t o see if y ou can

. . . l i st en t o t h e

ev i d en ce as i t ’ s p res en t ed i n t hi s cas e.” Th e co u rt co n t i n u ed : “ T he i n qu i ry i s wh et h er

y o u can fo l l o w y o u r o at h as a ju ro r wh ich wo u l d be t o l is t en t o al l o f t h e e v i d en ce

p res en t ed an d t h e l aw t h at t h e Co u rt g i v es y o u an d m ak e a d et erm i n at i o n bas ed o n t h e

ev i d en ce t h at i s p res en t ed d u ri n g t h e cas e, t h e l aw t h at I g i v e y ou , an d t h en reach a

v erd i ct aft er y ou ’ v e h eard t he ev i d en ce an d t h e l aw[.] ”

6Ad d it i on al l y

, d u ri n g it s g en eral v o i r d i re q u es ti o n s

, t h e St at e s o u gh t t o i d en t i fy

ju ro rs w h o fel t t h at

, d ue t o t h e “ n at u re o f t h e ch arg es [,] ” t h ey co u l d n o t ren der a “ fai r

an d i m p art i al ” d eci si o n b as ed u p o n t he ev i den ce p res en t ed i n t he co u rt ro o m

. Bes i d es

q u es ti o n 3 0, q u ot ed ab o v e, t h e d efen s e w as al s o al l o wed to as k

, i n t er al ia, wh et h er

k n o wi n g t h at t h e al leg ed v i ct i m was b et w een t he ag es o f s i x an d ei g h t, an y on e fel t h e

o r s h e co u l d n o t b e fai r an d i m p art i al

.

Bas ed u po n t h e g en eral v o i r d i re q u es t i o ns p os ed t o t he ju ry

, 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 us e it s bro ad di s cret i o n b y d en y i n g Sl ack ’ s q u es t i o n s eek i n g

t o ex p o se b i as bas ed u p o n a ch i ld ’ s ab i l it y t o d es cri be s ex u al act s, becau s e p recl u d i n g

t h i s q u es t i o n d i d n ot creat e a real ri s k t h at ju ro r p art i al i ty d ri v en b y

t h e fact at i s s u e

wo u l d n o t o t h erwi s e b e i d en ti fi ed i n v o i r d i re. 8

2

. Sl ack co n t en d s th at h e was den i ed effect i v e as s i st an ce o f co u n s el i n s ev eral

res p ect s

.

To p rev ai l o n a cl ai m o f i n effect i v e as s i s t an ce o f co u n s el

, a

de f e nda nt g en eral ly m

us t s h o w t hat co u n s el ’ s p erfo rm an ce was de f i c ie nt

an d t h at t h e d efi ci en t p erfo rm an ce res u lt ed i n p reju d i ce t o t h e d efen d an t

.

To s at i s fy t h e d efi ci en cy

p ro ng , a d efen d an t m

u s t d em on s trat e th at h i s

at t o rn ey p erfo rm ed at t ri al in an o b ject i v el y u n reas on ab l e way

co n s i d eri ng al l t h e ci rcu m st an c e s an d i n t h e l ig h t of p rev ai l i n g

8 See Hu r t v. S t at e , 2 98 Ga. 5 1 , 5 9 (4 ) (7 79 SE2 d 3 1 3 ) (2 0 1 5 ).

7p ro fes s io nal n orm s . Th i s req ui res a d efen dan t t o ov erco m e t h e “ st ro n g

p res um p t i o n” t h at tri al co u n s el ’ s p erfo rm an ce w as ad eq u at e. To s at i s fy

t h e p reju d i ce p ro n g

, a d efen d an t m u s t es t ab l i s h a reas o n ab le p ro bab i l i t y

t h at

, i n t h e ab s en ce o f co u n s el ’ s d efi ci en t p erfo rm an ce, th e res u l t o f th e

t ri al w o ul d hav e b een d i fferen t

. A reas o nab l e p ro b ab i l i t y i s a p ro bab i l i t y

s u ffi ci en t t o u n d erm in e co n fi den ce i n t h e o u t co m e. 9

(a) In l i g h t o f o u r h o l d i n g i n Di v i s i o n 1 , s u p ra, we n eed n o t co n s i d er Sl ack ’ s

cl ai m t h at co u n sel was i n effect i v e to t h e ex t en t s h e fai led t o p res erv e an o bject i o n to

t h e t ri al co urt ’ s ex cl u s i o n o f Gen eral Qu es t i o n 3 1

.

(b ) Sl ack arg u es t h at t ri al co u n s el was i n effect iv e b ecau s e s h e fai l ed t o o b ject

t o h ears ay tes t i m o n y fro m V. S.’ s g ran d m o th e r

, f a t h er, an d m o t h er an d fro m

Det ect i ve Ben n et t

.

As an i n i t i al m at t er, we n o te t h at t h e n ew Ev i d en ce Co d e ap pl i es t o t h i s cas e

b ecau s e t h e Ap pel l an t was t ri ed i n Au g u s t 2 01 3

, aft er t h e J an u ary 1

, 2 0 13 effect i v e

d a t e of t he n ew Co d e. 1 0 Ho wev er, t h e v ers i o n o f t h e Ch il d Hears ay St at u t e t h a t

ap p li es is fo rm er OCGA § 2 4 -3 -1 6 wh i c h was i n effect at t h e t i m e th e Ap p el l an t

co m m i t t ed t h e o ffen s es . Th e s t at u t e p ro v i d ed :

9 S wa n s o n v. S ta t e

, 3 06 Ga. 1 5 3

, 1 5 5 (2 ) (8 2 9 SE2 d 3 1 2 ) (2 0 1 9 ) (ci tat i o n s an d

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

1 0 See Ga. L. 2 0 1 1 , p p

. 9 9 -1 00 , § 1

.

8A s t at em en t m ad e b y a ch i l d u n d er t h e ag e o f 1 4 y ears d es cri b in g an y act

o f s ex u al co n t act o r ph y s i cal ab u se p erfo rm ed w i th o r o n t h e ch i l d b y

an o t her o r p erfo rm ed wi t h o r o n an o t h er i n t h e pres en ce of t h e ch il d i s

ad m i s s i b l e i n ev i d en ce b y th e t es t i m o n y o f t h e p ers o n or p ers o n s t o

wh o m m ad e i f t he ch i l d i s av ai l ab l e t o t es ti fy i n th e p ro ceed in g s an d th e

co u rt fi n d s t h a t t he ci rcu m s t an ces of t h e s t at em en t p ro v i d e su ffi ci en t

i n d i ci a o f rel iab i l i t y

.

Becau s e V

. S. was 1 6 y ears o l d wh e n s h e m a d e t he i n i t i al o u tcry t o h er

g ran d m o t h er an d th e s u b s eq u en t o u t cri es

, t ho s e s t at em en t s were n o t ad m i s s ib l e u n d er

t h e Ch i l d Hears ay St at u t e. H o w ev er, s u ch ev i d e n c e w a s c u m u lat i v e o f V. S.’ s o wn

t es t i m o ny

, wh i ch al o n e w as su ffi ci en t to su p p o rt Sl ack ’ s co n vi ct i o n s

. 1 1 An d

, t h ere

was o t h er co rro b o rat i n g ev i d en ce, s u ch as t es t i m o n y t h a t

, du ri n g th e rel ev an t t i m e

p eri o d

, V. S. refu sed t o b at h e, was freq uen t l y “ s p aced o u t ,” an d wo ul d s cream wh en

i t was ti m e t o ret u rn h o m e aft er v i s i t i n g h er fat h er o r g ran dm o t h er. “ [W ] h ere as h ere

t h ere i s n o p reju d ice, i n effect i v en es s o f co u n sel d o es n o t l i e.” 1 2

(c) Sl ack arg u es t h at t ri al co u n sel was i n effe c t i v e i n fai li n g t o req u es t a ju ry

i n s t ru ct i o n o n th e s t at u t e o f l i m i t at i o n wi t h reg ard t o t he ch i l d -cru el t y ch arg e (Co u nt

1 1 See Br o ck v. S t a t e

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

1 2 Id

.

93 ) b ecau s e t h e i n d i ct m en t d i d n o t i n cl u d e an y t o l li n g l an g u ag e as t o t h at co u n t

. W e

ag ree an d rev ers e t h e co n v ict i o n o n Co u n t 3

.

Th e fi rs t t wo co u n ts o f t he 2 0 1 3 i n d ict m en t

, wh ich ch arg ed ag g rav at ed ch i ld

m o les t at i o n an d c h i l d m o l es t at i o n

, al l eg ed cert ai n co n d u ct o ccu rri ng b et ween

Sep tem b er 2 0 0 2 an d Decem

b er 2 0 0 3 ag ai n s t V. S., “ a ch i l d u n d er t h e ag e of s i x t een

(1 6 ) y ears [.] ” Th e t h i rd co u n t

, h o wev er, al leg ed t hat

, d u ri ng t h i s sam e 2 0 0 2 -2 0 0 3

t i m efram e, Sl ack “ m al i ci o u s ly cau se[d V. S.]

, a ch i l d un d er t h e ag e o

f 1 8

, cru el an d

ex ces s i v e m en t al p ai n b y repe a t e dly e nga ging in s ex u al act i v i ty wi th [h er] .” 1 3 Becau s e

t h e fi r s t t w o c o u n t s al l eg ed co n d u ct ag ai n s t a ch i l d u n d er ag e 1 6

, t h ey i n v o k ed t h e

t o l l i n g p ro vi s i o n s o f OCGA § 1 7 -3 -2 .1 (a). 1 4 T he l an gu ag e o f t h e t h i rd co u n t d i d n ot

i n v o k e t h e t o l l i n g p ro v i s i o n

, an d was s u b ject t o d i s m i s s al as th e i nd i ct m en t was n ot

1 3 (Em p has is s u pp l i ed .)

1 4 OCGA § 1 7 -3 -2 .1 (a) p ro v i d es i n p art : “ Fo r cri m es co m m i t t ed d u ri n g t h e

p eri o d b eg i n n i n g o n J ul y 1

, 19 9 2

, an d en d in g o n Ju n e 3 0

, 2 0 1 2

, i f t h e v i c t i m o f a

v i o l at i o n o f: (1 ) Cru el t y t o ch i l d ren

, as d efi n ed in Co d e Sect i o n 1 6-5

- 7 0 ; [ o r ] ( 5 )

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

, a s d efi n ed in Co d e Sect i o n

1 6 -6 -4 [,] i s u n d er 1 6 y ears o f ag e o n t h e dat e o f t h e v i ol at io n

, th e ap p l i cab l e p eri o d

wi t h i n wh i ch a p ro s ecu t i o n s hal l b e co m m en ced un d er Co d e Sect i o n 1 7 -3 -1 o r o t h er

ap p li cab l e s t at u t e s h al l n o t beg i n t o ru n un t i l th e v i ct im h as reach ed t h e ag e o f 1 6 o r

t h e v i o lat i o n i s rep o rt ed t o a l aw en fo rcem en t ag en cy

, p ro s ecu t i ng at t o rn ey

, o r o t h er

g o v ern m en t al ag en cy

, wh i ch ev er o ccu rs e arl i er. Su ch l aw en fo rcem en t ag en cy o r

o t h er g o v ern m en t al ag en cy s h al l p ro m

p t l y rep o rt s u ch al l eg at i o n t o t h e ap p ro p ri at e

p ro s ecu ti n g at to rn ey .”

10fi led wi t h i n sev en y ears o f t h e ch arg ed co n d u ct

. 1 5 Th i s i s s o ev en t h o u g h th e p rev i ou s

t wo co un t s i n cl ud ed t h e t o l li n g l an g u ag e. T h e St at e’ s rel i an ce o n ou r d eci s i o n in

Lef t wi ch v. S t a t e 1 6 t o s u p p o rt it s arg u m en t t h at t he i n d i ct m en t sh o ul d be read as a

wh o l e i s m i s p l aced

. 1 7

In cri m i n a l c a s es

, t h e s t at ut e o f l im i t at io n ru n s fro m t h e ti m e o f

t h e cri m i n al act t o t h e t i m e o f i n d i ct m en t

. W h ere an ex cep t i o n i s rel ied

u p o n t o p rev en t t he b ar o f t h e s t at u t e o f l i m i t at i o n

, i t m u s t b e a l l e

g e d

a n d p r o ved

. In d eed

, t h e St at e b ears t h e b u rd en at t ri al t o p ro v e t h at a

cri m e o ccu rred wi t h i n t h e s t at ut e o f l i m i t at i o n

, o r, if an ex cep t i o n t o th e

s t at u t e is al leg ed

, t o p ro v e t h at t h e cas e p ro p erl y fal ls wi t h i n th e

ex cep t i on

. 1 8

1 5 See OCGA § 1 7 -3 -1 (c) (s t at u t e o f l im i t at i o ns fo r fel on i es n o t p u n i s h ab l e by

d eat h o r a l i fe s en t en ce i s s ev en y ears w hen t h e v i ct i m is u n d er 1 8 y ears o l d ); S t a t e

v. Go df r ey

, 3 09 G a. Ap p

. 23 4

, 2 3 8 (2 ) (7 0 9 SE2 d 5 7 2 ) (2 0 1 1 ) (h ol d i n g t h at t h e t ri al

co u rt di d n ot err i n g ran t in g a p l ea i n b ar as t o co u n t s t hat d i d no t track t h e ap p l i cab l e

v ers i on o f t h e t o l l i n g s t at u t e).

1 6 2 9 9 Ga. Ap p. 39 2 (6 8 2 SE2 d 61 4 ) (2 0 0 9 )

, d i sap p ro ved in p art o n o t h er

g ro u nd s b y Ma r t i n v. McLa u g h l i n , 2 9 8 Ga. 4 4 (7 7 9 SE2 d 2 9 4 ) (2 0 1 5).

1 7 See Go d

f r ey , 3 0 9 Ga. Ap p . at 2 3 8 (2 ).

1 8 Ta yl o r v. S t a t e

, 3 0 6 Ga. 2 7 7

, 2 8 6 ( 3 ) (b ) (8 3 0 SE2 d 9 0 ) (2 0 1 9 ) (em p h as i s

s u p p li ed ).

11Becau s e t h e St at e d i d n o t al leg e t h at t h e s t at u t e o f l i m i t at i o n fo r ch i l d cru el t y was

t o l l ed b ecau s e V. S was u n der t h e ag e o f 1 6 , s u ch p ro o f was i n ad m i s s ib l e. 1 9 “ As n o

ex cep t i o n was al leg ed in t h e i n di ct m en t

, t h e St at e was i n cap ab l e o f p r o v i n g an

ex cep t i o n t o t o l l t he ap pl i cab le [s ev en 2 0 ] -y ear s t at u t e o f l i m it at i o n

, as su ch p ro o f was

i n ad m is s i b le.” 2 1 Th u s, ev en t h o u g h t h e ev i d en ce at t ri al was u n d i sp u ted t h at V. S. was

b et ween s ev en an d ei g h t y ears o l d at t h e t im e o f t h e ab u s e, t h i s ev i d en c e w a s

i n ad m is s i b le t o pro ve t h at t h e s t at u te o f l i m i t at i o n fo r Co u n t 3 was t o l l ed

. 2 2

(i ) Def ici en cy pr o n g. At t h e m o t i on fo r n ew t ri al heari n g

, Sl ack ’ s t ri al co u n s el

t es t i fi ed t h at s h e was g en eral l y fam i l i ar w i t h t o l l i n g p ro v i s i o n s, t h at s h e b el i ev ed t h ey

s h o u ld be i n cl u d ed i n th e i n d i ct m e n t

, t h a t s h e was u n s u re w h et h er i t was su ffi ci en t

1 9 See Mo ss v. S t a t e , 2 2 0 Ga. Ap p

. 1 5 0 (4 69 SE2 d 3 2 5 ) (1 9 9 6 ).

2 0 See OCGA § 17 -3 -1 (c).

2 1 Mo s s , 2 2 0 Ga. Ap p . at 1 5 0

.

2 2 See Ja n n u zz o v. S t a te

, 3 2 2 Ga. Ap p. 7 60

, 7 6 1 -7 6 2 (7 4 6 SE2 d 23 8 ) (2 0 1 3 )

(“ Cri m i n al l i m i t at i o n s s t at u t es are t o b e l i beral ly i n t erp ret ed i n fav o r o f rep o s e. Th e

ru n n in g o f a s t at u t e o f l i m i t at i o n fo r a cri m i n al o ffen s e i s o rd in ari l y n o t i n t erru p t ed

u n l es s an ex cep t i o n t o l l s i t s o p erat io n . Ex cep t io n s wi l l n o t b e i m p l i ed t o s t at u t es o f

l i m i tat i on fo r cri m i n al o ffen s es

, an d an y ex cep t i o n t o t he l i m i t at i o n p eri o d m u s t b e

co n st ru ed n arro w l y an d i n a l ig h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e accu s ed

. ”) (ci t at io n s an d

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

12t o al l eg e t h at t h e v i ct i m was u n d er ag e 1 8

, an d t h at s h e h ad n o st rat eg ic reas o n n o t to

req u es t a ju ry

i n st ru ct i on i f t here was a v al i d s t at u t e o f l i m i t at i o n d efen s e.

[A] l t h o u g h d eci s i o n s o f co u n s e l m ad e b as ed o n a

m i s u n d ers t an d i n g o f th e law are n o t au t o m at ical l y d efi ci en t

, a d efen d an t

can carry hi s b u rd en o f s ho wi n g d efi ci en cy i f, u n d er th e ci rcu m st an ces

,

t h e ch al len g ed act i o n can n o t b e co n s i d ered a s o u n d t ri al s trat eg y . Th at

i s t h e cas e h ere, wh ere reas o n ab l e t ri al co u n s el wo u l d n o t hav e m ad e th e

s am e s t rat eg ic d eci s i on i f [s ] h e p ro p erl y u n d ers t oo d t h e l aw. 2 3

Becau s e t h e St at e d i d n o t al l eg e a b as i s fo r t o l l i n g as t o Co u nt 3 , b ecau s e t h e St at e

co u ld t h u s n o t m eet i t s b u rd en 2 4 o f p ro v i n g t h at t h e cri m e occu rred wi t h i n t h e s t at u t e

o f l im it at i o n

, an d b ecau s e t h e t r ial co u rt d i d n o t p ro perl y i n st ru ct t h e ju ry o n t h e

St at e’ s b urd en i n t h i s reg ard , t ri al co u n s el ’ s p erfo rm an ce was d efi ci en t

. 2 5

(i i) Pr ej u d i ce p r o ng

. “ To au t h ori ze a ju ry in s t ru ct i o n, t h ere n eed o n l y b e s l i g ht

ev i d en ce at t ri al su p p o rt in g t he t h eo ry o f t h e ch arg e.” 2 6 As d is cu s s ed ab ov e, b ecau s e

2 3 S wa n s o n , 3 0 6 Ga. at 1 5 8 (2 ) (a).

2 4 See Go d

f r ey , 3 0 9 Ga. Ap p . at 2 3 8 (2 ).

2 5 Cf. Ta yl o r

, 3 0 6 Ga. at 2 8 8 (5 ) (b ) (i i) (n o d efi ci en t p erfo rm an ce i n fai l i n g to

req u es t a m o re s peci fi c i n st ru ct i o n wh ere t h e St at e al l eg ed t o l l i n g; t h at al l eg at i o n was

t h u s m at eri al

, an d t h e t ri al co u rt p ro p erl y in s t ru ct ed t h e ju ry o n t h e St at e’ s bu rd en to

p ro v e ev ery

m at eri al al l eg at i on i n t h e i n di ct m en t ).

2 6 S wa n s o n , 3 0 6 Ga. at 1 5 5 (2 ).

13t h e St at e fai l ed t o al l eg e t ol li n g as t o Co u n t 3

, i t co u l d n o t p ro v e i t at t ri al

. Th u s

, t h e

ev i d en ce t hat t h e ch i l d cru el t y t o o k p l ace in 2 0 02 an d 2 00 3

, m or e t h an t en y ears

b efo re t h e i n di ct m en t was fi l ed

, s u p p o rt ed a t h eo ry t h at t h e ch arg e was barred b y t h e

s ev en -y ear s t at u t e o f li m i tat i o n

. Th e i n st ru ct io n wa s t h u s au t h o ri zed

. H ad t h e ju ry

b een p ro p erl y i n s t ru ct ed

, t h ere i s a “ reas on ab l e p ro b ab i l i t y ” t hat

, b u t fo r t ri al

co u ns el ’ s d efi ci en t p erfo rm an ce, t h e o u t co m e o f t h e t ri al wo u ld h av e b een di fferen t

.

“ In o t h er w o rd s

, [Sl ack ] h as es t ab l is h ed a ‘ p ro b ab il it y s u ffi ci en t to u n d erm i n e

co n fi d en ce i n t h e o u tco m e’ i n Sl ack ’ s t ri al .” 2 7

3

. In l i g h t o f o u r d eci s i o n i n D i v i s i o n 2 (c), rev ers i ng t h e co n v ict i o n an d t h e

s p l i t s en t en ce o n Co u nt 3

, w e rem an d t h e cas e fo r res en t en ci n g as to Co un t s 1 an d 2

. 2 8

Ju d g men t a f f i r m e d i n p a r t a n d r ever s ed in p a r t a n d ca s e rema n ded wi th

d i r ect i o n. Mi l l er

, P. J., a n d

Ri ckma n , J., co n cu r

.

2 7 Id

. (q u o t i n g St r ickl a n d v. W as h in g t on

, 4 6 6 U. S. 66 8

, 6 9 4 (III) (B) (1 0 4 SCt

2 0 5 2 , 8 0 LE2 d 6 7 4 ) (1 9 8 4 )).

2 8 See OCGA § 1 7 -1 0 -6 .2 (b ); Hu g hes v. S t at e

, 3 4 1 Ga. Ap p

. 59 4

, 5 9 7 -5 9 8 (3 )

(8 0 2 SE2 d 5 9 4 ) ( 2 0 1 7 ) ( “ A s en t en ce t h at do es n o t co m p l y w i t h t h e OCGA §

1 7 -1 0-6

. 2 sp l i t -s e n t en ce req ui rem en t i s v o i d

. W e are req u i red t o co rrect a v o id

s en t en ce, reg ard l es s o f wh et h er ei t h er p art y h as rai s ed t h e erro r o n ap p eal .”).

14