In th e S u p re m e Co u rt o f Ge o rg ia

De c id e d: S e p te m b e r 1 4 , 2 0 15

S 1 5 A0 8 7 6 . S HOCKLEY v . THE S TATE.

B ENHAM , Ju stic e

.

Ap p e lla n t Ja c qu e s Sh oc k le y wa s c o n v ic te d o f m a lic e m u rd e r a n d o th e r

c h a rg e s a risin g o u t o f t h e Ap ril 1 8

, 2 0 0 5 sh o o tin g d e a th o f S h a h Wa lto n

. 1

Witn e ss Mo n a Ga n tt te stifie d th a t b e twe e n 9 : 1 5 p.m

. a n d 1 0 :0 5 p .m

. o n th a t

e v e n in g

, sh e wa s wa lk in g h o m e a n d sa w th e v ic tim wa lk in g o u t of a m u sic sto re

.

S h e a lso sa w a

p p e lla n t a n d h is c o -in d ic te e M a rq u e z P o we ll sta n d in g n e a r a re d

c a r in th e sto re p a rk in g lo t

. A s sh e k n e w a ll th re e m e n

, sh e sa id h e llo

. S h e

1 The crimes o ccurred o n April 18, 2005. On September 9, 2005, a F ulton County g rand jury

returned an indictment charg ing appellant with malice m u r d e r

, f elony murder (ag g ravated assault

with a deadly weapon), ag g ravated assault with a deadly weapon, and possession of a f irearm during

the commission of a felony . Appellant was tried J une 22-25, 2009, and the jury returned a verdict

of g uilty on all c harg e s. The felony murder convictio n i s v a cated as a matter of law, and the

ag g r avated assault conviction merg ed with the malice murder conviction for sentencing purposes.

The trial court sentenced appellant to life in prison for the malice murder c onviction. The trial court

entered a suspended sentence of fiv e y e a rs i m p risonment for conviction on the possession of a

firea r m c h a r g e, to serve consecutively to the life sentence. After the trial court entered an order

allowing a

ppellant to file an out of time motion for new trial, appellant filed a motion for new trial

on A pril 14, 2 010, which was later amended. F ollowing a hearing

, the trial court denied the motion

for new trial by order dated Aug u st 15, 2013. Appellant filed a timely n otice of appeal, and the case

was docketed in this Court to the April 2015 term for a decision to be made on the briefs.o b se rv e d th e th re e m e n g e t in to th e c a r, with th e vic tim in th e d riv e r ’ s s e a t

,

P o we ll in th e re a r se a t b e h in d t h e d riv e r, a n d a p pe lla n t in th e fro n t p a sse n g e r

se a t. T h e me n p ro c e e d e d to tra v e l in th e d ire c tio n o f wh e re th e c a r a n d th e

v ic tim ’s b o d y we re fo u n d a sh o rt tim e la te r.

Two tria l w i t n e s s es te stifie d th a t o n th e n ig h t o f th e v ic tim ’s sh o o tin g

,

th e y o b se rv e d a v e h ic le c o m e to a n a b ru p t sto p a fte r strik in g a u tility p o le

. Th is

o c c u rre d a t a lo c a tio n ju st o v e r a h a lf m ile fro m wh e re Ms. G a n tt sa w th e th re e

m e n ge ttin g in to a re d c a r, a n d t h e v eh ic le th a t stru c k th e p o le m a tc h e d th e

d e sc rip tio n o f th e on e se e n b y Ms. Ga n tt. Im m e d ia te ly a fte r th e ve h ic le stru c k

th e po le

, th e witn e sse s sa w a m a n e xit th e re a r o f th e v e h ic le o n th e d riv e r’s sid e

a n d p a c e b a c k a nd fo rth fo r a fe w se c o n d s u n til a se c o n d ma n ex i t e d t h e c a r

fro m th e fro n t p a sse n g e r sid e

. On e o f th e witn e sse s sa w th e two m e n sto p a t th e

re a r o f th e c a r, a s if th e y w e re try in g to d e c id e wh a t to d o . Th e n , th e two m e n

ra n o ff to g e th e r a n d d isap p e a re d in to a tra il th ro u gh th e wo o d s. T h e e ng in e o f

th e c a r c o n tin u e d to re v

, a s if th e d riv e r still h a d h is fo o t o n t h e g a s p e d a l.

Ac c o rd in g to th e witn e sse s’ te stim o n y

, b e twe e n te n to th irty -fiv e m in ute s a fte r

th e c ar stru c k th e p o le th e witn e sse s a p p ro a c h e d th e v e h ic le to in v e stig a te

. Th e y

d isc o v e re d th e v ic tim b e h in d th e wh e e l in th e driv e r’s se a t o bv io usly d e a d

, with

2h is le ft po c k e t tu rn e d in sid e o u t a s if so m e o n e h a d re a c h e d in to it a n d p u lle d it

o u t. On e o f th e witn e sse s te stifie d h e th e n c a lle d 9 1 1

, an d th e e v id e n c e sh o we d

a 9 1 1 c a ll c a m e in a t 9 :5 4 p .m

. 2 A p o lic e d e te c tiv e wa s d isp a tc h e d to th e sc e n e

a n d a rriv e d a t a

p p ro x im a te ly 1 0 :0 0 p .m

. P o we ll’s siste r te stifie d th a t b e twe e n

a p p ro x im a te ly 1 1 :1 5 p .m

. to 11 :3 0 p .m

. P o we ll te le p h on e d h e r a n d a sk e d h e r to

c o m e p ic k h im up

. Wh e n sh e p ic k e d h im u p

, a b o u t se v e n b lo c k s fro m th e p la c e

wh e re th e v ic tim ’s b o d y wa s fo u n d , P o we ll wa s v isib ly u p se t a nd c ry in g

.

Th e m e d ic a l e x a m in e r te stifie d th e vic tim die d fro m a g u n sh o t wo u n d to

th e rig h t sid e o f th e he a d fro m a g un p la c e d a fe w in c h e s fro m th e h e a d

. A

g u n sh o t re sid u e te c h n ic ia n te stifie d th a t te st sa m p le s ta k e n fro m th e v ic tim ’s

h a n d s sh o w e d t h at h i s h a n d s d id n o t c o n ta in a n y g u n sh o t re sid u e

. In th e

m e d ic a l e xa m in e r’s o p in io n, th e v ic tim’ s de a th wa s th e re su lt o f ho m ic id e

.

F ro m th e witn e ss id e n tific a tio n a n d o th e r c irc u m s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e

, w a

r r a n ts we re

issu e d fo r b o th a

p p e lla n t a n d P o we l l

. Ap p e lla n t re m ov e d h im se lf fro m th e

ju risd ic tio n to h is fa th e r’s re sid e n c e in N e w J e r se y

, wh e re h e wa s e v e n tu a lly

2 Althoug h the witnesses d id not testify concerning the time at which they saw the car come

to an abrupt stop, their testimony supports the conclusion that this occurred between approx imately

ten to thirty -five minutes before the 9:54 call to 911 was placed, or between approx imately 9:20 and

9:45.

3a

p p re h e n d e d a n d b ro u g h t to tria l. In re sp o n se to a re q ue st to se v e r, th e a p p e lla n t

wa s tr i e d se p a ra te ly fro m P o we ll, a fte r P owe ll h a d a lre a d y b e e n trie d a n d

c o n v ic te d

. 3 Ap p e lla n t wa s se n te n c e d to life in p riso n fo r h is c o n v ic tio n o n th e

m a lic e m u rd e r c h a rg e b ro ug ht a g a in st h im

, a n d h e a p p e a ls. F o r th e re a so n s se t

fo rth h e re in , we a ffirm

.

1

. Alth o u g h n o dire c t e v id e nc e wa s pre se n te d lin k in g a p p e lla n t with th e

v ic tim ’s sh o o tin g d e a th

, th e c irc u m sta ntia l e v id e nc e

, wh e n vie we d in th e lig h t

m o st fa v o ra

b le to th e ju ry v e rd ic t, is su ffic ie n t to su p p o r t a fin din g o f g u ilt

b e y o n d a re a so n a

b le d o u b t in sa tisfa c tio n of th e sta n d ard se t fo rth in J a c k so n v

.

Virg in ia

, 4 43 U.S

. 3 0 7 ( 9 9 S Ct 2 7 8 1

, 6 1 LE2 d 5 6 0 ) (1 9 79 ). We re je c t

a p p e lla n t’s a sse rtio n t h a t t h e fa c ts p re se n te d a t tria l d id n o t e x c lu d e e v e ry

re a so na b le hy p o th e sis sa v e th a t o f h is g uilt, a s re q u ire d by OCGA § 2 4

- 4 -6

. 4

Ap p e lla n t’s prim a r y h y p o t h e sis p re se n te d to th e ju ry du rin g h is c lo sin g

a rg u m e n t wa s th a t Ms. Ga n tt wa s m ista ke n in h e r id e n tific a tio n o f a p p e lla n t a s

o n e o f th e m e n sh e sa w le a v e with th e v ic tim in th e re d c a r. Du rin g a pp e lla n t’s

3 Powell’s conviction w as affirmed by this Court. Powell v

. State

, 291 Ga. 743 (733 SE2d

294) (2012).

4 This case was tried under Georg ia’s previous Evidence Code. This former Code section

is now codified at OCGA § 24-14-6.

4a tto rn e y ’s c ro ss-e xa m in a tio n o f Ms. Ga n tt, w h o wa s fifte e n y e a rs old a t th e tim e

o f th e se e v e n ts, h e a tte m

p te d to im p e a c h h e r te stim on y a

b o u t th e e xa c t tim e sh e

sa w th e m e n in th e c a r a t th e m u sic sto re

, s i n c e sh e in itia lly te stifie d th a t sh e

p a sse d th e m

u sic sto re a t a

b o u t 9 :1 5 o n h e r wa y h o m e to m e e t he r 1 0 :3 0 c u rfe w,

b u t in th e sta te m e n t sh e g a v e a p p ro x im a te ly o n e m o nth a fte r th e sh o o tin g , sh e

to ld a u th o ritie s th a t sh e sa w th e m e n a bo ut 1 0 :0 5

. Th e c re d ib ility o f witn e sse s,

h o w e v er

, is a qu e stio n fo r th e ju ry

. “Ap p e lla te c o u rts

. . . do n o t re -we ig h

e v id e n c e o r d e te rm in e th e c re d ib ility o f witn e sse s o n a p p e a l, b u t ra th e r a

p p e lla te

c o u rts d e fe r to th e ju ry ’s fin din g s.” Po we ll v

. S t a t e

, 2 9 7 Ga

. 3 5 2 (7 7 3 S E2 d

7 6 2 ) (2 0 1 5). N o r d o a

p p e lla te c o u rts re so lv e c o n flic ts in te stim o n y o r e vid e n c e

,

a s th a t is th e fu nc tio n o f th e ju ry

. S e e S la to n v

. Sta te

, 2 9 6 Ga

. 12 2

, 1 2 4 (1 ) (7 6 5

S E2 d 3 32 ) (2 0 1 4 ).

P o we ll’s siste r te stifie d th a t P o we ll a n d th e v ic tim we re b e st frie n d s a n d

b u sin e ss a sso c ia te s, a n d th a t th e y so ld d ru g s fo r a liv in g

. No e v id e n c e

, ho we ve r,

wa s p re se n te d lin k in g a

p p e lla n t with th e o th e r m e n ’s d ru g a c tiv ity

. Ap p e lla n t

a rg u e s th a t th e tria l e v id e n c e p ro v e s n o th in g m ore th an his a sso c ia tio n with

k n o w n d ru g d e a le rs, a

n d th a t th is wa s in su ffic ie n t to su pp ort h is c o n vic tio n fo r

e v en t s th a t h a d th e a

p p e a ra n c e o f a dru g -re la te d killin g

. Ap p e lla n t lik e n s t h e

5fa c ts o f t h is c a se to th o se in Bro o k s v

. S ta te

, 5 in wh ic h th e a p p e lla te c o urt

re v e rse d a d ru g c o nv ic tio n wh e re th e c irc u m sta n tia l e vid e nc e e sta b lish e d little

m o re th a n th e fa c t th a t th e a p p e lla n t wa s o b se rv e d ta lk i n g t o a k n o wn d ru g

d e a le r a nd sta n din g with in a fe w fe e t o f a h id d e n sta sh of c o c a in e

. Id

. a t (1 ).

Th e e v id e n c e in th is c a se

, h o we v e r, c o n sists o f su b sta n tia lly m o re th a n sim p ly

b e in g se e n in th e pre se n c e o f th e v ic tim an d h is d ru g -d e a l i n g a sso c ia te o n th e

e v e n in g o f th e v ic tim ’s sh o o tin g

. Th e sh o rt in te rv a l b e twe e n th e a pp ro x im a te

tim e a p p e lla n t wa s se e n e nte rin g th e p a sse n ge r sid e o f th e c ar d riv e n b y th e

v ic tim

, wh ic h wa s a lso o c c up ie d b y h is c o -in d ic te e

, a n d th e a pp ro x im a te tim e

(a ) two m e n we re se e n e x itin g a n d ru n n in g fro m a c a r o f th e sa m e d e sc rip tio n ;

(b ) wh ic h h a d c ra sh e d in to a p o le o n ly a sh o rt d ista n c e a wa y fro m wh e re th e y

h a d p re v io u sly b e e n se e n ; (c ) wh ic h c a r w a s a lso d riv e n by th e v ic tim ; a n d (d )

in wh ic h c a r th e v ic tim wa s fo u n d sh o t in th e h e a d a t c lo se ra n g e , is su ffic ie n t

to p e r mit a ra tio n a l ju ry to fin d a p p e lla n t g u ilty b e y o n d a re a so n a b le d o u b t o f

th e c rim e s fo r wh ic h h e wa s c o n v ic te d

.

Th o ug h th e e v id e n c e d id n o t c on c lu siv e ly e sta b lish wh ic h o f th e two c o

in d ic te e s a c tu a lly sh o t th e v ic tim

, th e ju ry wa s in stru c te d a s to th e sta nd a rd fo r

5 206 Ga. App. 485 (425 SE2d 911) (1992).

6c o n v ic tin g a d e fe n d a n t a s a pa rty to a c rim e

. A p p e lla n t a sse rts th e e v id e n c e d oe s

n o t su p po rt h is c o n v i c tio n a s a p a rty to th e c rim e s fo r wh ic h he wa s c h a rg e d

b e c a u se n o e v id e n c e w a s p re se n te d th a t a p p e lla n t wa s “ c o n c e rn e d in th e

c o m m issio n ” o f t h o s e c rim e s, a s re qu ire d b y O CGA § 1 6 -2 -2 0 (b ) (1 )

- (4 ).

S p e c ific a lly

, a

p p e lla n t a sse rts n o e v id e n c e wa s p re se n te d to e sta b lish a c o m m o n

c rim in a l in te n t w ith h is c o -in d ic te e

. Bu t th is Co urt h a s o fte n h e ld th a t a ju ry is

a u th oriz e d to fin d a d e fe n d a n t g u ilty a s p a r t y t o a c rim e fro m e v id e n c e o f th e

d e fe n d a n t’s pre se n c e

, c o m p a nio n sh ip

, an d c o n d u c t be fo re an d a f t e r a c rim e

. S e e

S ta te v

. J a c k so n

, 2 9 4 Ga

. 9

, 1 1 (7 4 8 SE2 d 9 0 2 ) (2 0 1 3 ), an d c a se s c ite d th e re in

.

Ev id e nc e su p po rtin g th e c o n c lu sio n th a t a pp e lla n t wa s in th e c a r a t th e tim e o f

th e sh o o tin g

, th a t h e fle d th e sc e n e with h is c o -in d ic te e

, a n d th a t h e la te r fle d th e

ju risd ic tio n wa s su ffic ie n t fo r a ra tio n a l trie r o f fa c t to fin d a p p e lla n t g u ilty a s

a p a rty to th e c rim e s.

2

. Du rin g d e lib e ra tio n s, th e ju ry p r e s e n t e d th e tria l c o urt w ith th e

fo llo win g writte n q u e stio n : “Ca n /d o e s m a lic e b e c o m e im p lie d b a se d o n th e

d e sig n a tio n o f th e p a rtie s t o a c r i me ? ” Th e tria l ju d g e c o nsu lte d with th e

p ro se c u tin g a tto rn e y a n d a p p e lla n t’s tria l c o u n se l a n d in d ic a te d h e wa s in c lin e d

,

in re sp o n se

, to re fe r th e ju ry to th e c h a rg e s g iv e n w ith re sp e c t to wh e n a p e rso n

7m a y b e fo u n d g u ilty a s a pa rty to a c rim e

. Ap p e lla n t’s tria l c o u nse l re sp o n d e d

th a t th e in stru c tio ns sp e a k fo r th e m se lv e s, a n d o b je c te d to a n y re sp on se t h a t

e m p h a siz e d a n y p a rtic u la r c h a rg e s, be c a u se h e b e lie ve d th e ju d g e a nd a tto rn e y s

we re m e re ly sp e c u la tin g a b o u t wh a t th e ju ry wa s re a lly c o n c e rn e d with

. Afte r

a b rie f disc u ssio n

, th e tria l c o u rt re sp on de d in w ritin g to th e ju ry b y in stru c tin g

th e ju ry to re fe r to a sp e c ific se t o f n u m b e re d c h a rg e s in th e c h a rg e p a c k e t; th ose

c h a rg e s c o rre sp o n d e d with th e fu ll sta te m e n t o f th e la w re g ard in g c o n v ic tio n

a s a pa rty to a c rim e

, a l l o f wh ic h we re ta k e n fro m th e S u g g e ste d P a tte rn Ju ry

In stru c tio n s. Ap p e lla n t n o w a sse rts th e ju ry ’s q ue stio n wa s a m b ig u o u s a s to

wh ic h c o u n ts o f th e in d ic tm e n t th e ju ry ’s q u e stio n re fe rre d to

, a n d th a t th e tria l

c o u rt e rre d b y fa ilin g to re c a ll th e ju ry a n d ga in c la rific a tio n a b o u t its q u e stio n

ra th e r th a n m e re ly g u e ssin g a t wh a t th e ju ry m e a nt b y it. Be c a u se a p p e lla n t d id

n o t sp e c ific a lly re q u e st th e tria l c o u rt to se e k fu rth e r c la rific a tio n fro m th e ju ry

a b o u t its q u e stio n b e fo re th e c o urt re sp o n d e d to it, a p p e lla n t fa ile d to p re se rv e

th e issu e

, a n d a

pp e lla te re v ie w wo u ld b e a v a ila b le o n ly if th e tria l c o u rt’s

re sp o n se to th e ju ry q u e stio n c o n stitu te d p la in e rro r a ffe c tin g th e su b sta n tia l

rig h ts o f th e p a rtie s. OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 8 (b ); Aik e ns v

. S ta te

, 2 9 7 Ga

. 2 2 9 (2 ) (7 7 3

S E2 d 2 2 9 ) (2 0 1 5 ) ; R u

f f i n v

. S ta te

, 2 9 6 Ga

. 2 6 2

, 2 64 (2 ) (b ) (7 6 5 S E2 d 9 1 3 )

8(2 0 1 4 )

. In th is c a se

, a s in Aik e n s

, th e tria l c o urt’s in itia l c h arg e s to th e ju ry

(h e re

, th e c h a

rg e s re la tin g to c o nv ic tio n a s a p a rty to a c rim e ), we re c o rre c t, a n d

a p p e lla n t ha s fa ile d to sh o w a n y re a so n to b e lie v e th a t th e tria l c ou rt’s re sp o nse

to th e ju ry ’s qu e stio n “ a ffe c te d h is ‘su b sta n tia l rig h ts’ in an y wa y .” Aik e n s

,

su p ra

.

3

. F in a lly

, a p p e l l a n t a sse rts in e ffe c tiv e a ssista n c e o f tria l c o u nse l with

re sp e c t to c o u n se l’s fa ilu re to c a ll a p p e lla n t’s m o th e r or o th e r fa m ily m e m b e rs

a s a lib i witn e sse s. At th e m o ti o n f o r n e w tria l h e a rin g

, a

pp e lla n t’s m o th e r

te stifie d th a t sh e h a d sp o k e n with tria l c ou n se l a b o ut wh a t h e r te stim o n y wo u ld

b e c o nc e rn in g h e r so n ’s wh e re a b o u ts on th e n ig h t in q u e stio n

. S h e a lso te stifie d

th a t th e re a so n fo r a

p p e lla n t’s trip o u t o f sta te to v isit h is fa th e r a fte r th e

sh o o tin g wa s n o t m a d e to a v o id a rre st. Ap p e lla n t’s m o th e r e x p e c te d to b e c a lle d

a s a witn e ss b u t, in ste a d

, sh e wa s n e ith e r c a lle d a s a witn e ss no r n o tifie d th a t th e

tria l h a d c o m m e n c e d

. Tria l c o u n se l, h o we v e r, te stifie d th a t h e d e c id e d n o t to

c a ll h e r a s a witn e ss d u e to th e a m b ig u ity an d u nc e rta in ty a

b ou t th e tim e fra m e

in wh ic h sh e c o u ld a tte st h e r s o n w as a t h o m e o n th e n ig h t in q u e stio n

. Th e

m o th e r’s te stim o n y a t t h e m o tio n fo r n e w tria l h e a rin g e sta b lish e d th a t th e

fa m ily ’s h o m e wa s o n ly a b lo c k an d a h a lf fro m th e m u sic sto re wh e re Ms. Ga n tt

9te stifie d sh e sa w a p p e lla n t, h is c o -in d ic te e

, a n d th e v ic tim

. Sh e te stifie d sh e

e ith e r sa w o r h e a rd h e r so n in th e h o u se a t a bo ut 8 :3 0 p.m

., a n d sh e b e lie v e d h e

wa s pre se n t u p to th e tim e h e c a m e b y h e r b e d ro o m

, a t a bo ut 1 0 :0 0 p .m

., to te ll

h e r he wa s le a v in g th e h o u se

, b u t h e r te stim o n y e sta b lish e d th a t sh e wa s in h e r

b e d ro o m wa tc h in g te le v isio n fo r m o st o f th a t tim e

. C o n se qu e n tly

, h e r te stim o n y

d id n o t c o n c lu siv e ly e sta b lish th a t a pp e lla n t wa s a t h is h o m e d u rin g th a t p e rio d

o f tim e

. F u rth e r, tria l c o u n se l te stifie d h e wa s c on c e rn e d th a t ju ro rs wo u ld n o t

g iv e m u c h c re d it to th e m o th e r’s te stim o ny g iv e n h e r fa m ilia l tie s to a p p e lla n t.

A c la im o f in e ffe c tiv e a ssista n c e o f c o u n se l re q u i r es a sh o win g o f b o th

d e fic ie n t p e rfo rm a nc e of c o u n se l a n d p re ju d ic e fro m th a t d e fic ie n t p e rfo rm a n c e

.

S tric k la n d v

. W a sh in g to n

, 4 6 6 U.S

. 6 6 8

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

, 80 LE2 d 6 7 4

(1 9 8 4 ). A d e c isio n a s to w h ic h de fe n se witn e sse s to c a ll is a m a tte r o f c o u n se l’s

tria l stra te g y a n d ta c tic s a

n d will no t su p p ort a c la im o f in e ffe c tiv e a ssista n c e o f

c o u n se l u n le ss it is so u n re a so na b l e t h a t n o c o m

pe te n t a tto rn e y wo u ld h a v e

m a d e th e d e c isio n u n d e r th e c irc u m sta n c e s. J o n e s v

. S ta te

, 2 96 Ga

. 5 61

, 5 6 7 (4 )

(7 6 9 S E2 d 30 7) (2 0 1 5 ). “With re sp e c t to th e iss u e o f p e r fo rm a n c e

, wh e n

re v ie win g in e ffe c t i v e a s sista n c e o f c o u n se l c la im s, th is Co u rt a pp lie s a stro n g

p re su m p tio n th a t c o u n se l’s p e rfo rm a nc e f a l l s with in th e w id e ra n g e o f

10re a so na

b le p ro fe ssio n a l a ssista n c e .” Gill v

. Sta te

, 2 9 5 Ga

. 7 0 5

, 7 08 ( 2 ) ( 7 6 3

S E2 d 7 1 9) (2 01 4 ). He re

, tria l c o u n se l’s te stim on y sh o ws h is e le c tio n n ot to c a ll

a p p e lla n t’s m o th e r wa s c o n sid e re d

, in fo rm e d

, a n d re a so n a b le

, a nd th is Co urt

c a n n o t sa y th a t t h i s d e c isio n wa s o u tsid e th e ra n ge of re a so n a b le p ro fe ssio n a l

a ssista n c e

. Th u s, a

p p e lla n t ha s f

a i l e d to e sta b lish h is c o u n se l’s p e rfo rm a n c e wa s

d e fic ie n t, o n e of th e e sse n tia l p ro n g s of th e sta n d a rd fo r p r o v i n g in e ffe c tiv e

a ssista n c e o f c o u n se l.

Ju d g m e n t a ffirm e d . All th e Ju stic e s c o nc u r.

11