FI FTH DI VI SI ON

M CFA DDEN, P. J.

, BRA NCH and BETHEL, 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

October 19, 2017



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 7 A1 02 6 . M CALLISTER v . THE STATE.

M C F A D D E N , Pres id i n g J u d g e.

A ju ry fo un d Mo n t y M cAl l i s t er g u i l t y o f ag g rav at ed s tal k i n g an d cri m i n al

t res pas s

. Th e t ri al co u rt i m p o s ed a t en -y ear s en ten ce fo r t h e ag g rav at ed st al k i n g an d

a co n cu rren t t wel v e-m o n th s en t en ce fo r t he tres p as s. M cA l l i s t e r m o ved fo r a n ew

t ri al

, wh i ch t h e t ri al co urt d en i ed

. M cAl l i s t er ap p eal s

, arg u i n g t h at t h ere was

i n s u ffi ci en t ev i d en ce s u pp o rt i n g th e ag g rav a t e d s t a l k i n g co n v i ct i o n

, t h at t h e t ri al

co u rt co m

m i t t ed p l ai n erro r i n re-ch arg i n g t h e ju ry o n ag g rav at ed s tal k i n g

, an d t h at

h i s t ri al co u n s el was i neffect iv e. Ho wev er, t h ere was e n o u g h ev i d en ce fro m wh i ch

t h e j u ry was au t h o ri zed t o fi n d M cAl l is t er gu i lt y b ey on d a reas o n ab l e d o u b t o f

ag g rav at ed s t al k i n g

, t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t co m m it p lai n erro r i n re-ch arg i n g t h e ju ry

o n t he s t at u t o ry d efi n i t io n o f ag g rav at ed s t al k i n g

, an d M cAl l i s t er h as fai l ed t o s h o wt h at h i s t ri al co u n s el ’ s p erfo rm an ce was b o t h d efi ci en t an d preju d ici al

. Acco rd i n g l y

,

we affi rm

.

1

. S u f f ici en cy o f t h e evi d en ce.

M c A lliste r c ha l le nge s the suf f ici en cy o f t h e ev i d en ce s u p p o rt ing h is a ggr a va te d

s t al k in g co n v i ct i o n

. Th e ch al l en g e i s wi t h o u t m eri t

.

Th e ap p l i cab le s t an d ard o f rev i ew d irect s t h at wh en rev i ewi n g a

d efen d an t ’ s ch al l en g e t o t h e s u ffi ci e n c y o f t h e ev id en ce, we v i ew th e

ev i d e n c e i n t h e li g h t m o s t fav o rab l e to t h e ju ry ’ s v erd i ct

, an d th e

d e fen d an t n o lo ng er en

jo y s t h e p res u m

p t i o n o f i n n o cen ce. W e d o n o t

wei g h t h e ev i d en ce o r d et erm i n e wi t n es s cred i b i l it y

, bu t o n l y d et erm in e

i f t h e ev i d en ce was s u ffi ci en t fo r a rat i o n al t ri er o f fact t o f i n d th e

d efen d an t g u i l t y

o f t h e ch arg ed o ffen s e b ey o n d a reas o n ab l e d o u b t

.

Th o mp so n v. S t a t e

, 3 4 1 Ga. Ap p . 8 8 3 , 8 8 4 (1 ) (8 0 2 SE2 d 7 1 3) (2 01 7 ) (ci t at i o n an d

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

So v i ewed

, t h e ev i den ce s h o ws t h at o n Ap ri l 1 6, 2 01 1

, th e v i ct i m rep o rt ed to

p o l i ce t hat McAl l i s t er, her fo rm er b o y fri en d

, w as h aras s i n g h er. An o ffi cer res p o n d ed

t o t h e cal l an d wh i l e h e w as wi t h t h e v i ct i m at h er ap art m en t, M cAl li s t er cal l ed t h e

v i ct i m o n h er cel l p h o n e. Th e o ffi cer as k ed t he vi ct i m f o r h e r p h o n e

, h e t o ld

M cAl l i st er t h at h e h ad w i t nes sed t he v i ct i m t el l i n g h i m t o l eav e h er al o n e, an d h e t o ld

M cAl l i st er n o t t o co m e t o t h e v i ct i m ’ s ap art m en t. E arl y t h e n ex t m o rn in g

, t h e o ffi cer

recei v ed a cal l t h at M cAl l i s t er was at t h e vi ct im ’ s ap art m en t co m p l ex an d was

2p rev en ti n g h er fro m l eav i n g i n h e r c a r

. Th e o ffi cer w en t t o t h e co m p l ex an d s aw

M cAl l i st er s t an d i n g on t h e d ri v er’ s s i d e o f t h e v i ct i m ’ s car b eat i n g on t h e ro o f o f t h e

car. Th e offi cer arres t ed M cAl l i s t er fo r cri m in al t res p as s

. T h e f o l l o wi n g d ay

, Ap ri l

1 8

, 2 0 1 1

, M cAl l i st er was rel eas ed fro m jai l o n b on d

, wi t h t h e b o nd o rd er i n cl u d i n g

a s p eci al co n d i t io n t h at M cAl l i s t er h av e n o co n t act wi t h t h e v i ct i m . Th e n o -co n t act

co n di t i o n o f t h e b o n d o rd er p ro v i d ed :

Th at as a co n d i t io n o f p erm i t t i n g t h e De f e n dan t t o p o s t s ai d b o nd

, th e

Defen d an t s h al l n o t

. . . h av e an y fu rt h er co n t act

, d irect l y o r i n di rect l y

, b y p ers o n

, t el ep h o ne, co m p u t er, t h ro u g h a th i rd p art y o r an y ot h er m ean s

o f co m m u n i cat i o n wi t h t h e v i ct i m

. . . . Th at i n cl u des b u t i s n o t li m i ted

t o , at th e vi ct i m ’ s res i d en ce, wo rk p l ace, s ch o ol , an d p l ace o f ch i l d care

o r o t h er l o cat i on

. Vi o l a ti o ns co nnected w i th co nta cti ng o r fo l l o w i ng

the v i cti m m a y s ubject the Defenda nt to a s epa ra te pro s ecuti o n fo r

Ag g ra v a ted Sta l k

i ng

. (Em p h as is i n o ri g i n al .)

Sev eral m o n t h s l at er, o n J an u ary 1 6, 2 01 2

, M cAl li s t er c o n t a c t ed t h e v i ct i m

t wi ce: h e s en t h er a tex t m es sag e an d h e al s o t al ked t o h er on t he p h o ne, i n s is t i n g t h at

“ h e real l y n eed ed t o s ee her.” Th e n ex t m o rn i n g

, o n Jan u ary 1 7

, M cAl l i s t er d ro v e to

t h e v ict i m ’ s ap art m en t co m p l ex ; en t ered h er ap art m en t

, s et t i n g off t h e s ecu ri ty al arm ;

ri pp ed t he al arm o ff th e wal l an d k n o ck ed a p i ct u re o ff t h e w a l l ; w e n t i n t o t h e

v i ct i m ’ s b ed ro o m ; an d k i s s ed t h e v i ct i m

. A p o l i ce offi cer res p o n d ed t o t h e al arm cal l

at t h e ap art m en t

, wh ere h e fo un d t h e v i ct i m ap p eari n g s cared an d i n s h o ck at t h e d o o r.

3Th e v i ct i m wh i s pered t o t h e o ffi cer t h at t here was a m an i n her bed ro o m

, t h at h e was

h er ex -b o y fri en d, an d t h at sh e h ad n o t i n v i ted hi m to co m e t o h er ap art m en t

. W h en

t h e o ffi cer en t ered t h e ap art m en t

, h e fo u n d t h e b ro k en s ecu ri t y al arm ri p p ed fro m t h e

wal l

, th e p i ct u re k no ck ed t o t h e fl o o r, an d M cAl l i s t er l y i n g i n t h e v i ct i m ’ s b ed

. In s i d e

M cAl l i st er’ s car, wh ich was p ark e d o u ts i d e t he v ict i m ’ s ap art m en t

, o ffi cers l at er

fo u n d, am o n g o th er t h i n g s, p l as t i c res t rai n t s , d u ct t ap e, an d a b o x cu t ter.

In ch al l en gi ng t h e s u ffi ci en cy o f t h e ev i d en ce s u p p o rt i n g h i s ag g rav at ed

s t al k in g co n v i ct i o n

, M cAl l i s t er rel i es o n S ta t e v. Bu r ke

, 2 8 7 Ga. 3 77 (6 95 SE2 d 6 4 9 )

(2 0 1 0), wh i ch h el d t h at “ a s i n g l e v i ol at i on of a pro t ect i v e o rd er, by i t s el f

, d o es n ot

am ou n t t o ag g rav at ed st al k in g .” Id

. at 3 7 8 (fo o t no t e o m it t ed ; em p h as i s s u pp l i ed ). In

Bu r ke

, t h e Geo rg i a Su p rem e Co u rt fu rt h er hel d t h at ev i d en ce o f p ri o r d i ffi cu l ti es

b et ween t h e d efen d an t an d t h e v i ct i m co u l d n o t b e u s ed t o es t ab l i s h t h e ag g rav at ed

s t al k in g el em en t of a p at t ern o f h aras s i n g an d i n t i m i d at in g beh av i or b ecau s e t h e ju ry

h ad b een i n s t ru ct ed t h at s u ch p ri o r d iffi cu l t i es co u l d b e co n s i d ered o n l y f o r t h e

l i m i ted p u rp o s es o f s ho wi n g t he s t at e o f feel i n g b et ween t h e d efen d an t an d th e v i ct i m

an d t h e b en t o f m in d an d co u rs e o f co n d u ct o f t h e a c c u s e d

, an d t h at s u ch ev i d en ce

co u ld n o t b e co n s i d ered fo r an y o t h er p urp o s e. Id

. at 3 7 7-3 7 8

.

4M cAl l i s t er arg u es t h at b ecau s e t h e ju ry i n t h e i n s t an t cas e was g i v en a s i m i l ar

l i m i ti n g i n s t ru ct i o n reg ard i n g t h e p u rp o s e o f p ri or d i ffi cu l t i es ev i d en ce, th e ju ry was

n o t au t h o ri zed t o co n s i d er h i s p ri o r i n ci d en t wi t h t h e v i ct i m in Ap ri l 2 0 1 1 as ev i d en ce

o f a pat tern o f h aras s i ng an d i nt i m i d at in g b eh av i o r. An d wi t h o ut su ch ev i d en ce o f t h e

Ap ri l 2 0 1 1 i nci den t

, h e reas o n s

, t h ere was o n l y ev i d en ce o f a s i ng l e v i o l at i o n o f t h e

n o -co n t act b o n d p ro v i s i o n – wh en h e m ad e co n t act wi t h t h e v i ct i m at her ap art m en t

o n J an u ary 1 7

, 20 1 2

– w hi ch b y i t s el f was i ns u ffi ci en t t o s u p p o r t h i s ag g rav at ed

s t al k in g co n v i ct i o n

.

H ow e v er, co nt rary t o M cAl l i s t er’ s cl ai m

, t h e i n s t an t cas e i s m at eri al l y d i ff e r e nt

fro m Bu r ke

, i n wh i ch t h e “ en t i re cas e h in g ed o n t h e t h eo ry th at a s i n g l e v io l at i o n o f

a p ro t ect i v e o rd er, i n an d of i t s el f, was s u ffi ci en t t o es t ab l i s h t h e cri m e o f ag g rav at ed

s t al k in g .” Id

. at 3 78

. In t h is cas e, t h ere was ev i d en ce o f m o re t h an a s in g l e vi o l at i o n

o f t h e n o -co n t act b o n d o rd er wh i ch w as s u ffi ci en t t o es t ab l i s h t he cri m e of ag g rav at ed

s t al k in g

. Ev en as s u m i n g, w i t h o u t d eci di n g

, t h at t he ju ry w as n o t au t ho ri zed to

co n si d er ev i d en ce of t h e A p ri l 2 0 1 1 i n ci den t as p art o f a p at t ern o f h aras s i n g an d

i n t i m i d at i n g b eh av i o r, t h ere was o t h er ev i den ce fro m wh i ch t h e j u ry co u l d h av e fo u n d

s u ch a p at t ern of b eh av i o r. As reco un t ed ab o ve, t h e d ay b efo re M cAl l i s t er en t ered t h e

v i ct i m ’ s ap art m en t

, h e v i o l at ed t h e no -co n t act ord er t wi ce b y cal l i n g th e v i ct i m an d

5b y s en d i n g h er a t ex t m es s ag e. Th e ju ry was au t h o ri zed t o co n cl ud e t h at t h o s e act s o f

i m p ro p er co n tact

, al o n g wi t h th e fact s th at wh en M cAl li s ter en t ered t h e v i ct i m ’ s

ap art m en t h e ri p p ed th e al arm o ff t h e wal l

, k n o ck ed a p ai n ti n g t o t he fl o or, an d k i s s ed

t h e v i ct i m , co n s ti t u t ed a p at t ern o f h aras s i n g an d i n ti m i d at i n g b eh av i o r.

Al t h ou g h a s i n g le v i o l at io n o f a p ro t ect i v e o rd er, b y i t sel f

, d oes no t co n s t i t u t e

ag g ra va t ed s t al k in g

, s ee Bu r ke

, s u p ra at 3 7 8

, o u r Su p rem e Co u rt has fu rt h er ex p l ai n ed

t h at “ o f co u rs e o n e act of v i ol at i n g a p ro t ect i v e ord er, wh en d o ne a s pa r t o

f a p a t t er n

o f ha r a s s i n g a nd i n t i mi d a t i ng b eh a vi o r

, can co n st i tu t e th e cri m e o f ag g rav at ed

s t al k in g .” S t at e v. Cu s a ck

, 29 6 Ga. 5 3 4, 5 3 7-5 3 8 (7 6 9 SE2 d 3 70 ) (2 01 5 ) (ci t a t i on s

o m it t ed ; em

p h as i s s u p pl ied ). See al s o Da ker v. W i l l i a ms

, 2 7 9 Ga. 7 8 2

, 78 5 (6 2 1 SE2 d

4 4 9 ) (2 0 05 ) (t wo rel at ed i n s t an ces o f s t al ki n g b eh av i o r o ccu rri n g w it hi n th e s p ace o f

a s i n g l e week ev i nced a p at t ern o f p ro h i b i t ed b eh av io r cri m i n al i zed b y t h e s t al k i n g

s t at u tes ). Acco rd i n g l y

, b ecau s e t h ere was ev id en ce fro m wh i ch t h e ju ry was

au t h o ri zed t o fi n d t h at M cAl l i s t er’ s v i o l at i o n o f th e n o -co n t act o rd er b y g oi n g t o t h e

v i ct i m ’ s ap art m en t was d o n e as p art o f a p at t ern o f h aras si n g an d i n t i m i d at i n g

b eh av i o r o v er a t wo

- d ay p eri o d

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

ag g rav at ed s t al k i n g co n v ict i o n

.

2

. Rech a r g e o n a gg r a va t ed s ta l

ki n g

.

6Du ri n g del i b erat i on s

, t h e ju ro rs s en t a n o t e t o t h e j u d g e a s k i n g t o b e g i v en a

“ fu ll d es cri p t i o n ” o f OCGA § 16 -5 -9 1

, t h e ag grav at ed s tal k i n g s t at u t e

. In res p o n s e,

t h e ju dg e read t o t h e ju ry al l o f OCGA § 1 6 -5 -9 1 (a), wh i ch p ro vi des :

A p ers on co m

m i t s t h e offen s e o f ag g rav at ed s t al ki n g wh en s u ch p ers o n

, i n vi o l at i on o f a bo n d t o k eep t h e p eace p o s t ed pu rs u an t t o Co d e Sect i o n

1 7 -6 -1 1 0

, tem

p o rary res t rai n i ng ord e r

, t em p o rary p ro t ect i v e o rd er,

p erm an en t res t r a i n i n g o rd er, p erm an en t p ro t ect iv e ord er, p rel i m i n ary

i n ju n ct i o n

, go o d b eh av i o r b o n d

, o r p erm an en t i n ju n ct i o n o r co n d i t i o n o f

p ret ri al rel eas e, co n d i t i o n o f p ro b at io n

, o r co nd i t i o n o f p aro l e in effect

p ro h i b it i n g t h e b eh av i o r d es cri b ed in t h i s su b sect io n

, f o l l o ws

, pl aces

u n d er su rv ei ll an ce, o r co n t act s an o th er p ers o n at o r ab ou t a p l ace o r

p l aces wi t h o u t t h e co n s en t o f t h e o t h er p ers o n fo r t h e p ur p o s e o f

h aras s i n g an d i n ti m i d at i n g t h e o t h er p ers o n

.

Ho wev er, d u ri n g t h e rech arg e, t he ju d g e m i s read t h e fi n al p o rt i o n o f th e s t at u t e

b y st at i ng t h at a p ers o n co m m i t s ag g rav at ed s t al k i ng wh en s u ch p ers on

, i n vi o l at i o n

o f t he v ari o u s t y

p es o f o rd ers s et fo rt h i n t h e s t at u te, “ fo l l o w s

, p l aces u n d er

s u rv ei l l an ce, co nt a ct o

f o t h er p er

s o n o r o t h er p l a ces wi t h o u t t h e co n sen t o f t h e

p ers o n fo r t h e pu rp o s e o f h aras s i n g an d i n t im id at i n g o f t h e o t h er pers o n

. ” (Em p h as i s

s u p p li ed .) M cAl l i s ter d i d n o t o b ject t o t h e rech arg e.

M cAl l i s t er no w co nt en d s t h at t h e r e c h a r g e erro n eo u s ly p erm i t t ed t h e ju ry to

fi nd h i m g u i l t y o f ag g rav at ed s t al k i n g b as ed o n a m an n er no t al l eg ed i n t h e

i n d i ct m en t

. Sp eci fi cal l y

, h e cl ai m s t hat wh il e t h e i n d i ct m en t al leg ed t h at h e

7co m

m i t t ed ag grav at ed s t al k i n g b y h av i ng u nl awfu l co n t act w i t h t h e v i ct i m

, t h e

p o rt i on o f t h e rech ar g e em p h as i zed ab o v e erro n eo u s l y i ns t ru ct ed t h e ju ry t h at t h e

cri m e co ul d al s o b e co m

m i t ted b y h i m h av i n g h ad u n l awfu l co n tact wi t h a p lace

– i

. e.,

b reak i n g t h e s ecu ri t y

al arm i n s i d e t h e v i ct i m ’ s ap art m en t

.

Becau s e M cAl l i s t er di d no t o b ject to t he ju ry

rech arg e at t ri al , we rev i ew t h e

ch arg e fo r p l ai n erro r, w h i ch “ wi l l o n l y b e fo u n d i f t h e ju ry i n s tru ct i on w as erro n eo u s ;

t h e erro r was o b v i ou s ; th e i n s t ru ct i o n l i k el y affect ed t h e ou t co m e o f t h e p ro ceed i n g s ;

an d t h e erro r s eri o u s l y affect s t h e fai rn es s

, i n t eg ri t y

, or pu b l i c rep u t at i o n o f ju d i ci al

p ro ceed in g s .” Br a d l ey v. S t a t e

, _ _ Ga. Ap p

. _

_ _ (1 ) (Cas e No . A1 7 A 0 6 6 8 , d eci d ed

Au g u s t 4

, 2 0 1 7 ) (ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at io n o m i tt ed ). W h i l e t h e t ri al co u rt m i s read a

p o rt i on of t h e a g g r av at ed s t al k i n g s t at u te, t h e i n st ru ct io n d i d n ot l ik el y affect t h e

o u t co m e o f t h e t ri al an d t he m i s read i n g d i d no t s eri o u sl y affect t h e fai rn es s o r

i n t eg ri t y o f t h e p ro ceed i n g s . Du ri ng t h e rech arg e, i n ad d it i o n t o read i n g t h e s t at u t e,

t h e t ri al co u rt rem i n d ed t h e ju ry t h at t h e p ert i n en t p art o f t h e s tat u t e was ex cerp t ed in

co u nt t wo o f th e i nd i ct m en t

, wh i ch ch arg ed ag g rav at ed s t al k i n g b y u n l awfu l co n t act

wi t h t he v i ct i m . M o reo v er, t h e co u rt al s o cl earl y ex p lai n ed d uri n g t he rech arg e t h at

t h e s t at e’ s al l eg at i o n was t hat McAl l i s t er h ad v io l at ed t h e co n di t i o n of t h e b on d o rd er

t h at h e “ h av e n o co n t act wi t h th e al l e g e d v i ct i m [.] ” Un der t h es e ci rcu m s t an ces

, we

8f

i n d n o l i k el ih o o d t hat th e rech arg e l ed t h e j u ry t o b el i ev e t h at i t co u l d fi n d g u i l t

b as ed o n co n t act wi th a p l ace, rat h er th an un l awfu l co nt act w i t h th e v i ct i m

. See Jo n es

v. S t a t e

, 3 1 0 Ga. Ap p

. 70 5

, 7 1 0 (c) (7 1 3 SE2 d 8 9 5) (2 0 1 1 ) (“ ch arg e as g i v en was n ot

l i kel y t o m i s l ead t h e j u ry i n t o b el i ev i n g i t co u l d co nv i ct [t h e defen d an t ] s h o u l d t h ey

fi nd t h e ev i den ce s u p p o rt ed a fo rm o f ag grav at ed s tal k i n g n o t s p eci fi ed i n t h e

i n d i ct m en t ”).

3

. In ef f ect i ve a s s i s t a n ce o

f co u n s el

.

M cAl l i s t e r c lai m s t h at h i s t ri al co u n sel was i n effect i v e i n fai li n g t o o b ject to

a d et ect i v e’ s h ears ay tes ti m on y t hat t h e v i c t i m t ol d h er t h at McAl li s ter was n ot

s u p p os ed t o b e at h er ap art m en t an d t h at s h e wa s t e rri fi ed o f h i m

, an d i n fai l i n g to

i n t ro du ce ev i d en ce t h at t h e s t a t e had d i s m i s s ed t h e Ap ri l 2 0 1 1 cri m i n al t res p as s

ch arg e b y n o l le p ro s eq ui

. To p rev ai l o n t h es e cl ai m s

, M cAl l i s t er “ m u s t sh o w b o t h t h at

h i s co u n sel ’ s p erfo rm an ce w as d efi ci en t an d th a t t h e d efi ci en t p erfo rm an ce s o

p reju d i ced h i m t h at

, b u t fo r t he d efi ci en cy

, t h ere i s a reas o n ab l e p ro b ab i l i t y t h at t h e

o u t co m e o f t h e t ri al wo ul d hav e b een d i fferen t .” Da n i el v. S t a t e , 3 3 8 Ga. Ap p

. 3 8 9,

3 9 2 (3 ) (7 8 7 SE2 d 2 8 1 ) (2 0 1 6 ) (ci t at i o n s o m i t t ed ). “ Fai l u re t o m ak e t h e req u i red

s h o wi n g o f ei th er defi ci en t p erfo rm an ce or s u ffi ci en t p reju di ce d efeat s t h e

i n effect i v en es s cl ai m .” Cu s h en b er r y v. S t a te

, 3 0 0 G a. 1 9 0 , 1 9 7 (3 ) (7 94 SE2 d 1 6 5 )

9(2 0 1 6) (ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ). M cAl l i st er h as faile d to m ak e t he req u i red

s h o wi n g s

.

(a) Hea r s ay.

Th e d et ect i v e’ s t e s t im o n y ab o u t th e s t at em en t s m ad e b y t h e v i ct i m was

cu m u l at i v e o f o t h er ad m i s s i b l e ev i d en ce s h o wi n g t h at t h e vi ct i m was scared o f

M cAl l i st er an d t h at h e was n o t s u p p o s ed to be at h er ap art m en t

. In ad d it i on t o t h e

ev i d en ce s h o wi n g t h at t h ere was a n o -co nt act b o nd o rd er p ro h i b it i n g M cAl l i s t er fro m

g o i n g t o t h e v i ct i m ’ s ap art m en t

, t h at h e had rep eat ed l y v i o l at ed t h at o rd er, an d t h at

h e h ad ri p p ed t h e s ecu ri t y al arm o ff t h e wal l o f t h e v i ct i m ’ s ap art m en t

, t he o ffi cer

wh o res p o n d ed to t h e em erg en cy al arm cal l t es t i fi ed t h at t h e v i ct im was s cared an d

i n s h ock

. M o reo v er, t he t ri al co urt al s o al l owed th e res po n di n g o ffi cer t o t es t i fy ab o ut

wh at t he v i ct i m h ad t o ld h i m wh e n h e a r r i v e d at t h e s cen e, i ncl u d i n g h er s t at em en t

t h at s h e h ad n o t as k ed M cAl l i s ter t o co m e t o h er ap art m en t

, as s u ch s t at em en t s were

m ad e t o h el p t he o ffi cer m eet t he o n g o i n g em erg en cy o f ap p reh en d i n g an i n t ru d er in

t h e v i c t i m ’s h o m e

. See Mi l fo r d v. S t a t e

, 2 9 1 Ga. 3 4 7

, 3 4 8-3 4 9 (2 ) (7 2 9 SE2 d 3 5 2 )

( 2 0 1 2 ) (t ri al co u rt d i d n o t err i n ad m i t t i n g v ict i m ’ s s tat em en t s m ad e t o res p o n d i n g

o ffi cer at t h e s cen e as t h e s tat em en t s

, wh i ch were m ad e t o m eet t h e o n g o i n g

em erg en cy o f ap p reh en d in g arm ed d efen d an t s

, w e r e non- te stim onia l)

. I n ad d it i o n

, t h e

10ju ry was in s t ru ct ed t h at th e ev i d en ce o f p ri o r d i ffi cu l ti es bet ween M cAl l i s t er an d t h e

v i ct i m w as ad m i t ted fo r t h e p u rp o s es o f i l l u s t rat i n g “ t h e s t at e o f feel i n g s b et ween t h e

d efen d an t an d t h e al l eg ed v i ct i m an d t h e reas o nab l en e s s o f an y fears b y

. . . t h e

al l eg ed v i ct i m .”

Co n seq u en t l y

, ev en as s u m i n g t h at t h e lack o f a n o b j e c t i o n t o t h e det ect i v e’ s

t es t i m o ny was d efi ci en t

, t h ere i s n o reas o n ab l e p ro b ab i l i t y t h at t h e o u t co m e o f t h e

t ri al wo u l d h av e d i ffered had co u n s el m ad e s u ch an o b j ect i o n

.

As t h e ad m i s s i o n o f cu m

u l at ive h ears ay ev i d en ce i s co n s i d ered h arm l es s

erro r, a d efen dan t can n o t s h o w a reas o n ab l e p ro bab i l i t y t h at

, b u t fo r t ri al

co u n s el ’ s fai l ure t o o b

ject t o s u ch ev i den c e

, t h e o u t co m e o f th e t ri al

wo u ld h av e b een d i fferen t

. Th erefo re, t ri al co u n s el ’ s fai lu re t o o b ject t o

[t he d et ect i ve’ s ] t es t i m o n y d i d n o t am o u n t t o i n effect iv e as si s t an ce, an d

we fi n d n o erro r i n t h e t ri al co urt ’ s reject io n o f [t h i s] i n e f f e c t i v en es s

cl ai m

.

Lee v. S ta t e , 3 1 6 Ga. Ap p . 2 2 7 , 2 3 3 (2 ) (7 2 8 SE2 d 8 4 7 ) (2 0 1 2 ) (ci t at io n o m i t t ed ).

(b ) No ll e p ro s eq u i

.

M cAl l i s t er ci t es Beck v. S t a t e

, 2 50 G a. Ap p. 6 5 4, 6 6 1 (6 ) (5 5 1 SE2 d 6 8 ) (2 0 0 1 )

fo r th e p ro p o s i ti o n t hat t ri al co u n s el was d efi ci en t in fai li ng to i n t ro d u ce ev i d en ce t h at

t h e Ap ri l 2 0 1 1 cri m i n al t res p as s ch arg e was d i sm i s s ed b y n o l l e p ro s eq u i p ri o r t o t h e

t ri al i n t h e i n s t an t cas e. Bu t hi s rel i an ce o n Beck i s m i s p l a c e d

. It i s tru e t hat Beck

n o t ed t h at i n t h e cas e o f Jo n es v

. St a t e

, 1 5 9 Ga. Ap p

. 6 3 4 (2 8 4 SE2 d 6 51 ) (1 9 8 1 ),

11“ t h is [c] o u rt ru l ed th at ev i d en ce t h at d efen d an t was a c q u i t t e d i n a p ri o r cas e was

ad m i s s i b l e wh en t h e [s ] t at e i nt ro d u ced ev i d en ce o f t h e p ri o r c a s e t h ro u g h a s i m i l ar

t ran s act io n wi t n es s .” Beck

, s u p ra at 6 61 (6 ) (ci t at i on o m i tt ed ). H o wev er, t h e i n s t an t

cas e d i d n o t i nv o l v e an acq ui t t al o f t h e earl i er t res p a s s c h a r g e, so Beck do es n ot

m an d at e a fi n d i n g t h a t e v i d en ce o f t h e st at e’ s d eci s i o n n ot to p ro s ecu t e th at ch arg e

wo u l d h av e b een ad m i ss i b l e i n t h i s cas e.

Nev ert h el es s

, ev en i f we as su m e t h at s uch ev id en ce m i g h t h av e b een

ad m i s s i b l e, t h ere i s n o reas o n ab l e p ro b ab i l i t y t h at t h e o u t co m e o f t h e tri al wo u l d h av e

b een d i fferen t i f s u ch ev i d en c e h ad b een i n t ro d u ced

. It i s u n d i s p ut ed t h at t h e n o

co n tact b o n d o rd er u n d erl y i n g t h e ag g rav at ed s tal k i n g ch arg e i n t h i s cas e wa s in

effe c t at th e t i m e M cAl l i s t er i m p ro p erl y wen t t o th e v i ct i m ’ s ap art m en t i n J an u ary

2 0 1 2

. T h u s

, t h e fact t h at t he s t at e di s m i s s ed t h e earl i er 2 0 1 1 t res p as s ch arg e p ri o r to

t ri al h ad n o b eari n g o n th e v al id i t y o f t h at ch arg e or t he cu rren t t res pas s ch arg e, wh i ch

was bas ed o n t h e d am ag e t o t h e s ecu ri t y al arm i n th e v i ct i m ’s a p a r t m en t

.

Acco rd i n g l y, th e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t err i n d en y i n g th e i n effect i v en es s cl ai m o n t h i s

g ro u nd

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Br a nch a n d

Bet hel , JJ., co n cu r.

12