FOURTH D I VI SI ON

ELLI NGTON, P. J.

, BRA N CH and M ERCI ER, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a l s .us /r ule s

June 9, 2016



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 6 A0 32 3 . M A RTINEZ v . THE STATE.

B R A N C H , J u d g e.

M arco M art i n ez a p p eal s fro m a ju dg m en t o f co n v i ct i o n an d th e den i al o f h i s

m o ti o n fo r n ew tri al

. H e was co n v i ct ed o f ro b b ery b y s u d d en s n at ch i n g , fo u r co u n t s

o f fo rg ery i n t h e fi rs t deg ree, an d g i v i n g a fal s e nam e t o l aw en fo rcem en t

. On ap p eal

,

h e co n t en d s t h e ev i d en ce was in s u ffi ci en t to s u pp o rt th e co nv i ct i o n o f ro b b ery , t h at

t h e ru le o f l en i ty s ho u l d b e ap pl i ed t o h i s co n v i ct i o n s of fo rg ery , an d t hat 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

. Fo r t h e reas o n s s ho wn bel o w, we a f f i r m h i s

co n vi ct i o n s o f ro bb ery an d g i v i n g fal s e i n fo rm at i o n t o l aw en fo rcem en t

, b u t we

rev ers e h i s co n v i ct io n s o f fo rg ery an d rem an d fo r res en t en ci n g o n t ho s e co u n t s

.

“ On cri m i n al ap p eal

, ap p el l an t i s no l o n g er p res um ed i n n o cen t an d al l o f t h e

ev i d en ce i s t o b e v i ewed i n t h e l i g h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t he ju ry v erd i ct

. T h i s Co u rtd o es n ot reco ns i der ev id en ce o r at t em p t to co n fi rm t he accu racy of tes t i m o n y

.

As s es s in g a wi t n es s ’ s cred i b i l i t y i s t h e res p o n s i b i l i t y o f t h e fact fi n d er, n o t t h i s

Co u r t

. ” Ba t t en v. S ta te

, 29 5 Ga. 4 4 2, 4 4 3 (1 ) (7 6 1 SE2 d 7 0 ) (2 0 14 ) (ci t at i on s

o m it t ed ). In s t ead

, we rev i ew t h e cas e “ t o d et erm i ne i f t h e ev i d en ce, wh en vi ewed in

t h e l i g h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o th e pro s ecu t io n , s up p o rt s t h e v erd i ct .” W i l li s v. S ta t e , 2 6 3

Ga. 5 9 7

, 5 9 8 (1 ) (4 3 6 SE2 d 2 0 4) (1 99 3 ), ci ti n g 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

, 6 1 LE d 2 d 5 6 0 ) (1 9 7 9 ). Up o n rev i ew o f t h e s u ffi ci en cy o f t h e ev i d en ce,

“ t h e rel ev an t q ues ti o n i s w h et h er, aft er v i ewi n g t h e e v i d en ce i n t h e l i g h t m o s t

fav o rab l e t o t h e pro secu t i o n , a n y rat i o n al t ri er o f fact co u l d h av e fo u nd t h e es s en t i al

el em en t s o f th e cri m e b ey on d a reas o n ab l e d o u b t

. ” Ru s s u v. S t at e , 3 2 1 Ga. Ap p

. 6 9 5,

6 9 6 (1 ) (7 4 2 SE2 d 5 1 1 ) (2 0 1 3 ) (p u n ct u at i o n an d fo o t n o t e om i t t ed ; em p h as i s in

o ri g i nal ).

T h e e v i d e n ce p res en t ed at t ri al s h o w s t h at o n D ecem b er 2 7, 20 0 9

, Rh o n d a

Dan y u s an d h er h us b an d s t o pp ed at a res t area i n Tu rn er Co u n t y

. A t ap p ro x i m at el y

3 : 0 0 a.m ., Dan y

u s was i n a s t al l i n t h e l ad i es ’ ro o m wh en a pers o n , w h o Dan y u s

t es t i fi ed was weari n g a red “ s weat er-t y p e” jack et

, reach ed u n der t he s t al l d iv i d er fro m

t h e n ex t s t al l

, grab b ed Dan y u s ’ s p u rs e, an d left

. Dan y u s s cream ed

, an d Dav id

Bo wl i n g , wh o h ad al s o s t o p p ed at t h e res t area, h eard th e s cream s , s aw a m an ex i t i n g

2t h e l ad i es ’ ro om wi t h a wo m an ’ s p u rs e, an d y el l ed fo r t h e m an t o s t op

. Th e m an t o o k

o ff ru n ni n g , an d Bo wl i n g an d h i s t wo s o n s, wh o h ad h eard t h e co m m o t i on , b eg an to

c h a s e t h e m an , wh o was weari n g a red s w eat s h i rt

. Bo w l i ng ’ s s o ns cau g h t u p t o t h e

p ers o n i n t h e red s weat sh i rt

, t ack l ed h i m , an d b ro ug h t h i m b ack t o t h e res t area. W h en

as k ed i f t he m an w h o h is s o n s b ro u g h t b ack was weari n g t h e s am e t y p e o f cl o t h es t h at

h e s aw o n t h e m an wi t h t h e pu rs e, Dav i d Bo wl i n g t es t ifi ed

, “ Oh

, y es , i t was t h e s am e

i n d i v i d u al .” T h e p o l i ce ev en t u al l y arri v ed

, t o o k t h e m an i n to cu s t od y , an d Dan y u s

i d en t i fi ed t h e red s w e a t s h irt as b ei n g th e s am e t h e ro b b er wo re. Offi cers t h en

fo l l o w ed t h e t rai l of t h e ch as e an d fo u n d D an y u s ’ s p u rs e. Th e m an t he o ffi cers t o o k

i n t o cu s to d y was M art i n ez, t h e ap p el l an t

. W h en M art i n ez was b o o k ed i n t o jai l

, h e

g av e h i s n am e as “ Os car Cu el l o ” an d s i g n ed sev eral b o o k in g -rel at ed d o cu m en t s wi th

t h at n am e. Th e offi cers al s o fo u n d a fak e So ci al Secu ri t y card i n M art i n ez’ s

p o s s es s i o n ; t h e card was al s o i n t h e n am e “ Os car Cu el l o .”

M art i n ez was in d i ct ed as fo l l o ws : Co u n t 1

— ro b b ery b y s u dd e n s n at ch i n g

( O C G A § § 1 6 -8 -4 0 (a)(3 )); Co u n t s 2
- 5

— fo rg ery i n t h e fi rs t d eg ree fo r u s i n g a

fi ct i t io u s n am e o n fo u r s e p a rat e do cu m en t s (OCGA § 1 6 -9 -1 (b )); an d Co u n t 6

—

m ak i n g a fal se st at em en t b y p ro v i d i n g a fal s e n am e “ t h ro u g h o u t t he bo o k i n g an d

i n v es t i g at i o n p ro ces s s urro u n di n g a ro bb ery ” (OCGA § 16 -1 0 -2 0 ). M art in ez was n ot

3ch arg ed wi t h a cri m e ari s i n g o u t of h i s p o s s es s io n o f a so ci al s ecu ri t y card i n t h e

n am e o f Os car Cu el l o

.

At t ri al

, Mart i n ez d i d n o t co n tes t t hat h e g av e a fal s e nam e t o t h e o ffi cers an d

o n t he d o cu m en t s , an d th e ju ry fo u n d M art i n ez g u i l t y o n al l co u n t s

. H e was s en t en ced

t o 2 0 y ears fo r ro b b ery , 1 0 y ears o n Co u n t 2 t o ru n co n s ecu t i v e t o Co u n t 1

, 1 0 y ears

o n each of Co u n t s 3 t hro u g h 5 t o ru n co n cu rren t l y wi t h Co u n t 2

, an d 5 y ears o n Co u nt

6 t o ru n co n cu rren tl y

wi t h Co u n t 2

, fo r a t o t al o f 3 0 y ears wi t h 1 5 t o s erv e an d 5 o n

p ro b at i o n

. M art in ez m o v ed fo r a n ew t ri al

, wh i ch

, fo l lo wi n g a h eari n g , t h e t ri al co u rt

d en ied wi t h o n e ex cep t io n ; t h e C o u r t h e l d th at th e ru l e o f l en i t y req u i red t h at o n

C ou n t 6

, M art i n ez b e s en t en ced fo r t h e m is d em ean o r o ffen s e o f p ro v i d i n g f a l s e

i n fo rm at i o n t o l aw en fo rcem en t u n d er OCGA § 1 6 -1 0 -2 5

. Acco rd i n g l y , t h e co u rt

res en t en ced M art i n ez o n Co u n t 6 t o 1 2 m o n th s t o s erv e co n cu rren t wi th Co u n t 2

.

1

. Co n st ru ed i n fav o r o f t h e v erd i ct

, t h e ev i d en ce was s u ffi ci en t t o s u p p o rt t h e

c o n v i ct i o n o f ro b b ery b y s u dd en s n at ch in g ; M art i n ez d o es n o t ch al l e n g e t h e

s u ffi c i en cy o n t h e rem ai n i n g co u n t s

. Mart i n ez’ s arg um en t o n ap p eal i s t h at n o wi t n es s

ev er i d en t i fi ed h i m as t h e p ers o n wh o to o k t h e p u rs e an d t h at t h e ci rcu m s t an t i al

ev i d en ce t h at h e d id s o was i n s u ffi ci en t to ex cl ud e ev ery o t her reas o n ab l e h y p o t h es i s

s av e t hat o f t he g u i l t o f t h e accu s ed as req u i red b y OCGA § 2 4 -1 4 -6 (“ T o warran t a

4co n vi ct i o n o n ci rcu m s tan t i al ev i d en ce, th e p ro v ed fact s s h al l n ot o n l y b e co n s i s t en t

wi t h th e h y

po t h es i s o f gu i l t

, b u t s h al l ex cl u d e ev ery o t h er reas o n ab l e h y p ot h es i s s av e

t h at o f t h e g u i l t o f t h e accu s ed .”). Bu t t he ev i d en ce s ho wed t h at at 3 : 0 0 a.m

. at a res t

area, a m an i n a red jack et o r s weat er s t o l e a p u rs e fro m t h e res t ro o m , t h at h e was s een

l eav i ng t he b at h ro o m wi t h t h e pu rs e, t h at t h e s am e m an was ch as ed an d cau g h t

, t h at

h e was weari n g a red jack et

, t h at t h e p u rs e was fo u n d o n t h e ro u t e o f t h e ch as e, t h at

n o ev id en ce was p res en t ed t o s ho w t h at t here w ere o t h er m en i n red in t h e i m m ed i at e

v i ci n i t y , t h at M art i n ez g av e a fal s e n am e t o t h e o ffi cers i n v es t i g at i n g t h e cri m e, an d

t h at M art i n ez was t h e m an ch a s e d an d arres t ed t h at n i g h t

. Th i s ci rcu m s t an t i al

ev i d en ce was s u ffi ci en t t o i d en t i fy M art i nez as t h e pers o n wh o t o o k th e p u rs e. See

W a r e v

. S t a t e , 1 9 8 Ga. A p p. 2 4

, 2 5 -2 6 (1 ) (4 0 0 SE2 d 3 84 ) (1 9 9 0) (ci rcu m s t an t i al

ev i d en ce was su ffi ci en t t o id en t i fy t h e d efen d an t as t h e b u rg l ar, w h i ch i n cl u d ed t h at

d efen d an t was fo u n d wal k i n g n ear, i n p l ace an d ti m e, t o b u rg l ari zed res i d en ce; t h at

h e li ed ab o u t h i s i d en ti t y an d p ro d u ced a st o l en d ri v er’ s li cen se; t h at h e g a v e t h ree

d i fferen t s t o ri es ab ou t h i s co n d u c t ; t h a t h e was i n an area o f h o us es an d wo o d s at

ab o ut 7 : 0 0 a.m

. n ot n ear a p u rp o rt ed jo b ; t h at a b oo t p ri n t was fo u n d at t h e v i ct i m ’ s

h o m e an d t h e defen dan t w as weari n g bo o t s ; an d t he d efen d an t h ad a kn i fe wi t h p i ece

o f wi re o n i t

, an d a t el ep h on e wi re h ad b een cu t at t h e v i ct i m ’ s res i d en ce).

52

. M art i nez co nt en d s t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y n o t ap p l y i n g th e ru l e o f l en i t y to

Co u n t s 2 t h ro u g h 5

. He co n t en d s h e s h o ul d h av e b een s en t en ced u n d er OCGA § 1 6

-

1 0 -2 0 fo r m ak i ng a fal s e s tat e m en t o r wri t i n g , wh i ch carri es a p u n is hm en t o f

i m p ri s o n m en t fo r o n e t o fi v e y ears an d a fi ne, rat her t h an un d er OCGA § § 1 6 -9 -1 (b )

fo r fo rg ery i n t h e fi rs t d eg ree, wh i ch

, a t t h e t i m e of M art i n ez’ s co n v i ct i o n , 1 carri ed

a p u n i sh m en t o f i m

p ri s o n m en t fo r o n e t o t en y ears

.

Th e Su p rem e Co u rt recen t l y d es cri b ed t h e ru l e o f l en i t y as fo l l o ws :

W h en t h e s t at u t o ry l aw es t ab l i s h es d i fferen t p u n i s hm en ts fo r th e

s am e o ffen s e, co u rt s s o m et im es ap p ly t h e ru l e o f l en i t y t o r e s o l v e th e

s t at u t o ry am

b i g u i t y

. Pro p erl y ap p l i ed

, t h e ru l e o f l en i t y d i rect s t h e co u rt s

t o res o l v e s u ch am

b i gu i t i es i n fav or o f a d e fen d an t, acco rd in g th e

d efen d an t th e b en efi t o f t h e d o u b t ab o u t wh at p u n i s h m en t t h e l aw

au t h ori zes i n h i s cas e, an d p res u m i n g t h at t h e l aw was m ean t o n ly t o

p erm i t t h e l es s er pu n i s h m en t

. A l t ho u g h t h e r u le o f l en i t y perh ap s h as

b een ap p l i ed i n Geo rg ia m o s t co m m o n l y wh en t h e s t at u to ry l aw

es t ab l i sh ed b o t h fel o n y an d m is d em ea n o r pu n i s h m en t s fo r t h e s am e

o ffen s e, i t s ap p li cat i o n i s n o t l i m i t ed t o t h at p art i cu l ar ci rcu m s t an ce.

Ro l l f v. Ca r t er , 2 9 8 Ga. 5 5 7

,

_ (_ SE2 d

_ ) (2 0 1 6 ) (ci t at i o ns an d fo o t no t e o m i t t ed ).

“ Of co u rs e, i f i t i s d et erm i n ed aft er ap p l y in g t h e t rad i t i on al can o n s o f co ns t ru ct i o n

t h at t h e rel ev an t s t at u t o ry tex t i s u n am b i g uo u s , th en t h e ru l e o f l en i t y wi l l n o t ap p l y .”

1 See 2 0 1 2 Ga. L. § 3 -5 , eff. J u l y 1 , 2 01 2

.

6McNa i r v. S ta t e , 3 2 6 Ga. Ap p

. 5 1 6

, 5 1 8 -5 1 9 (7 5 7 SE2 d 1 4 1 ) ( 2 0 1 4 ) (fo o t n o t e

o m it t ed ). “ Th e fu n d am en t al i n q u i ry [ w h e n as s es si n g wh et h er t h e ru l e o f l en i t y

ap p li es ] i s wh et her t h e i d en t i cal co n d u ct [, m ean i n g t h e s peci fi c co n d u ct w i t h wh i ch

t h e d efen d an t was ch arg ed ,] wo u l d s u p p o rt a co n vi ct i o n u n d er ei t h er o f t wo [cri m i n al

s t at u tes ] wi t h d i fferi n g p en al t i es .” Id . at 5 1 9 (fo ot n o t e o m i t ted ).

Here, M art i n ez was ch arg ed wi t h fo u r co u n t s o f fo rg ery i n t hat h e d i d

u n l awfu l l y , w i t h i n ten t t o d efrau d

, k n owi n gl y m ak e a s i g n at ure o n th e

s i gn at u re l i n e o f [eac h o f f o u r sep arat e d o cu m en t s]

, a wri t i n g , i n th e

fi ct i ti o us n am e o f O s car Cu el l o , an d d i d u t t er an d d el i v er s ai d wri t i n g t o

t h e Tu rn er Co u n t y

Sh eri ff’ s Dep art m en t.

As d efi n ed at th e t i m e of t h e u n d erl y i n g o ffen s es , t he offen s e o f fo rg ery i n t h e

fi rs t d eg ree o ccu rred wh en ,

wi t h i n t en t t o d efrau d [a p ers o n ] k n o wi ng l y m a[d e]

, al t er[ed ]

, o r

p o s s es se[d ] an y wri t in g in a fi ct i t io u s n am e o r i n s u ch m an n er t h at th e

wri t i n g as m ad e o r al t ered p u rp o rt s t o h av e b een m ad e b y an o t h er

p ers on , at an o t h er t i m e, wi t h d i fferen t p ro v is i o n s , o r b y au t h ori t y o f o ne

wh o d i d n o t g i ve s u ch au t h o ri t y an d u t t ers o r d el i v ers s u ch wri ti n g

.

See OCGA § 1 6 -9 -1 (2 0 1 2 ). Th e o ffen s e o f m ak i n g a fal s e s t at em en t o r wri t i n g

o ccu rs wh en a p ers on

7k n o wi n g l y an d wi l l fu l l y fal s i fi es , co n ceal s , o r c o v e r s u p by an y t ri ck

,

s ch em e, o r dev i ce a m at eri al fact ; m ak es a fal se, fi ct i ti o u s , o r frau du l en t

s t at em en t o r rep res en t a t i o n ; o r m ak es o r u s es an y fal s e wri t i n g o r

d o cu m en t

, k n owi n g t h e s am e t o co n t ai n an y fal s e, f i c t i t i o u s , o r

frau d u l en t st at em en t or en t ry , i n an y m at ter w it hi n t h e ju ri s d ict i on of an y

d ep art m en t o r ag en cy o f s t at e g o v ern m en t o r o f t he g ov ern m en t of an y

co u n t y , ci t y , o r o t h er p o li t i cal s u bd i vi s i o n o f t h i s s t at e[.]

OCGA § 1 6

- 1 0 -2 0

. A l th o u g h t h e St at e arg ues t h at O CGA § 1 6 -1 0 -2 0 d o es n ot

req u i re a s h o wi n g o f “ i n ten t t o d efrau d ” li k e t he fo rg ery s t at u t e, OCGA § 1 6 -1 0 -2 0

req u i res t h e eq ui v al en t i n t h at i t req u i res t h e St at e t o p ro v e t h at t he pers o n k n o wi n g l y

an d wi l l i n g l y en g ag ed i n co n ceal i n g m at eri al fact s, m ak i n g frau d u l en t s tat em en t s , o r

fal s ify i ng d o cu m en t s k n o wi ng t h em t o b e fal s e o r f r a u d u l e n t

. M o reo v er, as t h e

Su p rem e Co u rt h as ex p l ai n ed

, OCGA § 1 6 -1 0 -2 0 carri es a m en s rea req u i rem en t t h at

“ req u i res a d efen d an t t o k n ow an d i n t en d

, t h at is

, t o co n t em p l at e o r ex p ect

, t h at [t h e

p ro h ib i t ed co nd u ct ] wi ll co m e to t h e at ten t i o n of a s t at e o r l o cal d ep art m en t or ag en cy

wi t h t h e au t ho ri t y t o a c t o n i t .” Ha l ey v. St a t e , 28 9 Ga. 5 1 5

, 52 1 (2 ) (b ) (7 1 2 SE2 d

8 3 8 ) (2 0 11 ). An d th at

, t h ereb y , t h e p ro h i b i ted co n d u ct “ t h re a t e n s t o decei v e an d

t h ereb y h arm th e g o v ern m en t .” Id

. at 5 2 8 (2 ) (c ) (ci t at i o n o m i t t ed ). Th u s, al t h o u g h

OCGA § 1 6-1 0 -2 0 d o es no t sp eci fi cal l y s t at e t h at t he d efen d an t m u st hav e act ed wi th

8“ i n ten t t o d efrau d ” as i s s t at ed i n t h e fo rg ery s t at ut e, OCGA § 1 6-1 0 -2 0 req u i res p ro o f

o f t h e s am e m en s rea.

Th u s , an ex am i n at i o n t h e p l ai n m ean i n g of t h e s tat u to ry l a n g u a g e o f t h e t wo

cri m es at i s s u e s h o ws t h at th e s p eci fi c co n d u ct wi t h wh i ch Mar t i n e z w as ch arg ed

wo u l d s u p p o rt a co n v i ct io n un d er ei t h er of t w o cri m es , t h ereb y creat i n g an am b i g u i t y

reg ard i n g t h e cri m e fo r wh i ch M art i n ez s h o u l d b e p u n i s h ed

. See B ro wn v. S ta t e , 2 7 6

Ga. 60 6

, 6 08 (1 ) & (2 ) (5 8 1 SE2 d 3 5 ) (2 00 3 ) (ru l e o f l en i ty ap p l i ed wh ere “ [u ] s i n g

t h e s am e ev i d en ce, a reas o n ab l e t ri er o f fact co u l d h av e fo u n d b ey o n d a reas o n ab l e

d o u b t t h at [t he d efen d a n t ’s ] co n d u ct v i o l at ed ei t h er” o f t wo st at ut es wi t h d i fferen t

p u n i s h m en t s ). Un d er OCGA § 1 6 -9 -1 (b ), M art i n ez was gu i l t y o f i nt en d in g t o d efrau d

t h e s h eri ff’ s dep art m en t by k n o wi n gl y m ak i n g fo u r wri t i n g s i n a fi ct it i o u s n am e.

Un d er OCGA § 1 6 -1 0 -2 0

, M art i n ez was g u il t y o f k n owi n g l y an d w i l lfu l l y m ak i n g a

fal s e st at em en t o f h i s n am e, i n fo u r wri ti n gs , wi t h t h e i n t en t t o d ecei v e a g o v ern m en t

en t i t y , i .e., t h e s h eri ff’ s d ep art m en t

. Th e St at e do es no t arg ue t h at a ru l e o f

co n st ru ct i o n w o ul d res o lv e th e ab o ve am b i g u i t y , an d we fi n d n o s u ch ru l e. Th erefo re,

b ecau s e t h es e two s t at u t es p ro v i d e fo r d ifferen t p en al t i es fo r t he s am e co n d u ct at

i s su e i n t h i s cas e, t h e ru l e o f l en i t y ap p l i es , an d M art i n ez m u s t b e res en t e n ced

acco rd i n g l y

. See McNa i r , 32 6 Ga

. A p p

. at 5 2 1

. W e t herefo re rev ers e M art i n ez’ s

9co n vi ct i o n o n fo u r co u n ts o f fo rg ery i n t h e fi rs t d eg ree an d rem an d fo r res en t en ci n g

u n d er OCGA § 1 6 -1 0 -2 0

. Id

. See al s o G ee v. St a t e , 2 25 Ga. 6 6 9

, 6 7 6 (7 ) (1 7 1 SE2 d

2 9 1 ) (1 9 6 9 ) (“ W h ere an y u n cert ai n t y d ev el o p s as t o wh ich pen al cl au s e i s ap p l i cab l e,

t h e accu s ed i s en t i tl ed t o h av e t h e l es ser o f t wo p en al t i es ad m i n i s t ered

. ”) (ci tat i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed ). 2

3

. M art i nez co n t en d s h i s t ri al co un s el was i n effect i v e. To p rev ai l o n t h i s cl ai m ,

a d efen dan t m

u s t p ro v e b o t h th at h is l awy er’ s p erfo rm an ce was defi ci en t an d t h at h e

s u ffered p reju d i ce as a res u l t o f t h i s d efi ci en t p erfo rm an ce. St r i ckl a n d v. W as h i n g t o n ,

4 6 6 U. S. 6 6 8

, 6 8 7 (III) (1 0 4 SCt 2 0 5 2

, 8 0 LEd 2 d 6 7 4 ) (1 9 8 4 ). If h e o r s h e can n ot

m eet t h e b urd en o f p ro v i n g ei t h er p ro n g o f t h e S t r i ckl a n d t es t

, t h en we n eed n ot

ex am i n e t h e o th er pro ng

. Ba t t l es v. S ta t e , 2 9 0 Ga. 2 26

, 2 2 9 ( 2 ) (7 1 9 SE2 d 4 2 3 )

(2 0 1 1).

W i t h res p ect t o t he fi rs t p ro n g , d efi ci en t perfo rm an ce, t h e defen d an t m u s t s h o w

t h at h i s at t o rn ey p erfo rm e d h i s d u t i es at t ri al i n an o b j ect i v el y u n reas o n ab l e way ,

2 Th e cas e up o n wh i ch t h e St at e rel ies

, Q u a w e a y v. S t at e , 2 7 4 Ga. Ap p

. 6 5 7,

6 5 8 (6 1 8 SE2 d 7 0 7) (2 0 0 5 ), i s i n ap p o si t e. In t hat cas e, t h e d efen d an t arg u ed t h at t h e

ru l e of l en i t y s h o u l d b e ap p l i ed t o req u ire s en t e n c i n g u n d er t h e cri m e o f m ak i n g a fal s e s tat em en t t o a p o li ce o ffi cer rat h er t h an fo r fo rg ery i n t h e fi rs t d eg ree. Bu t t h e d ef e n d a n t i n Qu a wea

y w as ch arg ed wi t h fo rg ery fo r si g n in g a fal s e n am e to
d o cu m en t s d uri ng h is arres t

, wh ereas t h e cri m e o f m ak i n g fal s e s tat em en t s t o an

o ffi cer, OCGA § 1 6-1 0-2 5 d i d n o t req u i re p ro o f o f a wri t i n g . Id

.

10co n si d eri n g al l t h e ci rcu m s t an ces , an d i n li g h t o f p rev ai l i n g p ro fes s i o n a l n o rm s

.

S t r i ckl a nd

, 4 6 6 U. S. at 6 8 7-6 8 8 (III) (A). To d em o n st rat e t h at h e s u ffered p reju d i ce,

a d efen d an t m

u s t p ro v e “ a reas o n ab l e p ro b ab i l i t y t h at

, bu t fo r co u n sel ’ s

u n p ro fes s i o n al erro rs , t h e res ul t o f t h e p ro ceed i n g wo u l d h av e b een di fferen t

. A

reas on ab l e p ro b ab i l it y is a p ro b a b i l i ty s u ffi ci en t t o u n d erm i n e co n fi den ce i n t h e

o u t co m e.” Id

. at 6 9 4 (III) ( B )

. “ Th i s b u rd en , t h ou g h n ot i m po s si b l e to carry , i s a

h eav y o n e.” Ar n ol d v. S ta te

, 2 9 2 Ga. 26 8

, 2 7 0 (2 ) (7 3 7 S E 2 d 9 8 ) (2 0 1 3 ), ci t i n g

Ki mmel ma n v. Mo r ri s o n , 4 77 U. S. 3 6 5, 3 82 (II) (C) (1 0 6 SCt 2 5 7 4, 9 1 LE2 d 3 0 5 )

(1 9 8 6). On a p p e a l “ we accep t t h e tri al co u rt ’ s fact u al fi n d i n g s an d cred i b i l i t y

d et erm i n at io n s u nl es s cl earl y erro n eo us , b ut we i n d ep en d en t l y ap p l y th e l e g a l

p ri n c i p l e s t o t h e fact s

. ” S u g g s v. S t a t e , 2 7 2 Ga. 8 5

, 8 8 (4 ) (5 2 6 SE2 d 3 4 7 ) (2 0 0 0 )

(fo o t no t e o m i t t ed ).

(a) M art i n ez co n t en d s t h at t ri al co u n s el was i n effect i v e b y fai l i ng t o o b ject to

ev i d e n ce t h at h e p o s s es sed a fo rg ed So ci al Secu ri t y card

, w h i ch

, h e as s ert s ,

co n st i t u t ed i m

pro per ch aract er ev i d en ce. Al t h ou g h M art i n ez w as n o t ch arg ed wi t h a

cri m e ari s i n g o u t o f t h e So ci al Secu ri t y card

, th e St at e i n t ro d u ced t h e card as a p art

o f i t s cas e i n ch i ef wi t h o u t o b j ect i o n b y M a r t i n e z ’ s t ri al co u n s el

. Th e St at e fu rt h er

es t ab l i s h ed t h at t h e card

, i n th e n am e of Os car Cu el lo

, was no t l eg i t i m at e an d t h at t h e

11So ci al Secu ri t y n u m b er w as no t i n u s e. Th e o ffi cer wh o t es t i fi ed ab o u t t h e card al s o

t es t i fi ed t h at h e det erm i n ed t hat Os car Cu el l o was n o t th e d efen d an t ’ s real n am e. At

t h e h eari ng 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 th at h e d i d n ot t h i n k t h e

card wo u l d m ak e an y d i fferen ce i n t h e cas e. W e ag ree. Al t h o u g h Mart i n ez co u l d h av e

o b ject ed t o t h i s i n fo rm at i o n , g i v en t h at h e ad m i t t ed t h at h e g av e a fal se n am e t o t h e

o ffi cers an d o n l y co n tes ted t h e fact s reg ard i n g t h e ro b bery

, we co n cl u d e t h at h e h as

fai l ed to es t ab l i s h a re a s o n a b l e p ro b ab il i ty th at

, i f h is co u n s el had o b ject ed t o t h e

i n t ro du ct i o n o f t h e s o ci al s ecu ri t y card

, t h e res u l t o f t h e p ro ceed i n g wo u l d h av e b een

d i fferen t. See g en eral l y Y o u n g v. S t a t e , 2 9 2 Ga. 4 4 3, 4 4 5 (3 ) (7 3 8 SE2 d 5 75 ) (2 0 1 3 ).

(b ) M art i n ez al s o co n t en d s t h a t t ri al co u n s el was i n effect iv e b y fai l i n g to

p rep are ad eq uat el y fo r t ri al

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

, t ri al co u n s el

t es t i fi ed th at h e m et wi t h M art in ez t h ree o r fo u r t im es p ri o r t o t ri al ; th at s o m e o f t h e

wi t n es s es l i v ed i n Fl ori d a an d Ken t u ck y ; an d t h at h e i n t erv i ewed t wo o r t h ree

wi t n es s es at th e co u rt h ou s e ju s t p ri o r t o t ri al

. Co u ns el d i d n ot recal l i f h e s p ok e t o an y

o f t h e l aw en fo rcem en t wi t n es s es

. Al s o , t h e reco rd refl ect s t h at t ri al co u n s el fi l ed a

d i s co v ery m o t io n, a m o t i o n fo r a p rel i m i n ary h eari n g , a n on -p art i cu l ari zed m o t i o n to

s u p p res s , a m o t i o n res erv i ng t h e ri g h t t o fi l e ad d it i o n al m o t i o n s , an d a m o t i o n fo r n ew

t ri al

.

12M art i n ez m ak es g en eral as s ert ions tha t his tr ia l c oun s el s h o u l d h av e d o n e m o re,

b u t a t t h e h eari n g on t h e m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al

, h e d id n o t p ro ffer wh at ad d i t i o n a l

i n v es t i g at i o n w o u l d hav e rev eal ed n o r h o w an y s u ch i n fo rm at i o n co u l d h av e l ed to

a d i fferen t res u l t

. T h u s M art in ez fai l ed t o p ro ffer an y wi t n es s es o r o th er ev i d en ce to

s h o w h o w ad d it io n al p rep arat i o n wo u l d h av e l ed t o us efu l i n fo rm at i o n fo r t ri al . “ In

t h e ab s en ce o f o fferi n g s u ch ev i d en ce at t h e m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al h eari ng , ap p el l an t

can n ot s h o w p reju d i ce.” Po wel l v. S t a t e , 2 9 7 Ga. 3 5 2

, 3 5 7 (5 ) (d ) (7 7 3 SE2 d 7 6 2 )

(2 0 1 5) (ci t at i o n s o m it t ed ).

Ju d g men t a f f i r med i n p a r t a n d rever s ed i n p a r t

, an d ca s e rema n d

ed f o r

r es en t en ci ng . El l i n gt o n , P. J., a n d Mer ci er , J., co ncu r

.

13