FI RST DI VI SI ON

BA RNES, P. J.

, GOBEI L and PI PKI N, 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.

https ://w w w

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

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

H I S

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

TH E TIM E S S E T B Y

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

.

M ar ch 11, 2021



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A2 0 A1 76 0 . GAGE v . THE STATE.

B A R N E S , Pres i d i n g J ud g e.

Fo l l owi n g a j u ry t ri al , Cet t i n a Gert ru d e Gag e w as co n v i ct ed o f t raffi ck i n g in

m et h am p h et am i ne. Gag e fi l ed a m o t io n fo r n ew t ri al

, wh i ch t he t ri al co u rt d en i ed

. On

ap p eal

, Gag e co n t en d s t h at h er t ri al co u ns el ren d ered i n effect iv e as s i s t an ce b y fai l i n g

t o i n t erp os e o b

j e c t i o n s wh en (1 ) t h e St at e an n o u nced t h e term s o f p ret ri al p l ea

n eg ot i at i on s o n t h e reco rd an d (2 ) t h e t ri al co u rt fai l ed t o i m po s e a red u ced s en t en ce

p u rs u an t t o OCGA § 1 6 -1 3 -3 1 (g ). Fo r t h e reas o n s ex p l ai n ed b el o w, we affi rm

.

[O] n ap peal fro m a cri m i n al co n v i ct i on , t h e ev i d en ce i s v i ewed i n

a l i g h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e v erd i ct

. W e d o n o t wei g h th e ev i d en ce o r

d et erm i ne wi t n es s cred i b i l i t y b u t o n l y d et erm i n e wh et h er t he ev i d en ce

i s s u ffi ci en t u n d er t h e s tan d a r d o f Ja cks o n v. Vi r g i n ia [, U. S. 3 07 (9 9

SCt 2 7 8 1

, 6 1 LE2 d 5 6 0 ) (1 9 7 9)]

. Th e j u ry ’ s v erd ict w i l l be u p h el d asl o n g as t h ere is s o m e co m p et en t ev i d en ce, ev en t h o u gh co n trad i ct ed

, t o

s u p p o rt each fact n eces s ary t o m ak e o u t t h e [S] t at e’ s cas e.

(Pu n ct u at i on an d fo o tn o t es om it t ed .) Nei ll v. S t a te

, 2 4 7 Ga. Ap p

. 1 5 2, 15 2 (5 4 3 SE2 d

4 3 6 ) (2 0 0 0 ).

So v i ewed , t h e reco rd sh o ws t h at o n t h e ev en i n g o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 1 7, an o ffi cer

wi t h t h e Ch ero kee Co u n ty Sh eri ff’ s Dep art m e n t wa s o n ro u t in e p at ro l w h en h e

o b s erv ed a v eh i cl e s p eed i n g o n t h e ro ad way

. Th e o ffi cer i n i t i at ed a traffi c s to p , wh i ch

was reco rd ed b y v i d e o t a k e n b y t h e p at ro l car’ s d as h cam era. Th ere were fo u r

o ccu pan t s i n t he v eh i cl e, o n e o f wh o m was Ga g e

. U p o n h i s i n i t i al ap pro ach

, t h e

o ffi cer d et ect ed t h e o d or of b u rn t m ari ju an a em an at i ng fro m i n s i d e t h e v eh i cl e. Th e

o f f i cer req u es t ed an d o b t ai ned t h e d ri v er’ s co n s en t t o s earch t h e v eh i cl e. Al l o f t h e

o ccu pan t s ex i t ed t h e v eh i cl e p ri o r t o t h e s ea r c h

, a n d t h e o ffi cer cal l ed fo r b ack u p

o ffi cers to as si s t wi t h t h e in ves t i g at io n

. D u ri ng t h e v eh i cl e search

, t h e o ffi cer

d i s co v ered t wo s u s pect ed T ram ad o l p i l l s i n t h e rear p as s en g er s i d e d o o r. A f t e r t h e

o ffi cer rep eat ed l y q ues ti o n ed t h e o ccupa nts, Gag e ev en t u al l y st at ed t h at t h e pi l l s were

h ers

.

Gag e was arres ted fo r t h e d ru g p os s es si o n o ffen s e. Th e o ffi c e r p erfo rm ed a

b ri ef p at -d own s e a r c h o f Gag e’ s pers o n i n ci d en t t o h er arres t

, b ut n o w eap o n s o r

2co n trab an d were d i s co v ered at t h at ti m e. T hereaft er, Gag e was t ran s p o rt ed t o t h e

C h e r o k e e Co u n ty jai l

. As a p art o f t h e jai l ’ s s t an d ard b o o k -i n p ro ced u re, a fem a l e

d ep ut y s earch ed Gag e ag ai n

. Du ri n g t h is s eco n d p at -d o wn search

, a s m al l g l as s p i p e

t y p i cal l y u s ed t o sm o k e m et h am p h et am i n e fel l fro m G ag e’ s pan t s a n d s h a t t ered o n

t h e fl o or. Th en , a m o re d et ai l ed s t ri p s earch o f G ag e was p erfo rm ed

. Du ri n g t h e s tri p

s earch

, t wo p l as t i c b ag gi es co n t ai n i n g cry s t al -l ik e s u b s t an ces s u s p ect ed t o b e

m et h am p h et am i ne were reco v ered fro m Gag e’ s p ers o n

.

Aft er t he o ffi cer read Gag e h er Mi r a n d a ri g h t s , 1 G ag e ag reed t o res p on d t o t h e

o ffi cer’ s qu es t i o n s reg ard in g the m e tha m phe ta m ine

. G a ge ’ s sta

tem en t s were reco rd ed

b y au di o

. Gag e t o l d t he o ffi cer t h at s h e h ad fo un d t h e m et h am p h et am in e an d p i p e o n

t h e v eh i cl e’ s fl o o rb o ard an d t h at s h e h ad u s ed t h e p i pe t o sm o k e s om e o f t h e d ru g s

.

Gag e ad m i tt ed p o ss es s i on o f th e m et h am ph et am i n e. Sh e fu rt h er i n fo rm ed t h e o ffi cer

t h at n o o n e h ad d em an d ed t h at s h e p i ck u p t h e d ru g s an d p u t t h em i n h er p an t s

.

T h e s u s p ect ed dru g s u bs t an ces were s u b m i t t ed t o th e Geo rg i a Bu reau o f

In v es t i g at i o n ’ s Cri m e Lab fo r tes t i n g

. Th e t es t res u lt s co nfi rm ed t h at t h e s ub s t an ces

were m et h am

p h et am i n e h av i n g a t o t al wei g h t o f 5 2 .9 3 8 g ram s

.

1 See Mi r a n d

a v. Ar i z o n a , 3 8 4 U.S. 4 3 6 (8 6 SC 1 6 02 , 1 6 LE2 d 6 94 ) (1 9 6 6 ).

3Gag e was ch arg ed wi t h t raffi ck i n g m et h am p h et am in e as p ro s cri b ed b y OCGA

§ 1 6 -1 3 -3 1 (e) an d p o s s es s i on of Tram ad o l as p ro s cri b ed b y O CGA § § 1 6 -1 3 -2 8 (a)

(3 1 .5 ) an d 1 6-1 3 -3 0 (a). At t ri al

, Gag e t es ti fi ed in h er own defen s e, d is cl ai m i n g an y

o wn ers hi p i n t eres t i n t h e d ru g s an d t h e g l as s p i p e t h a t h ad b een fo u nd i n h er

p o s s es s i o n

. Acco rd i n g t o Gag e, o n e o f t h e v eh icl e’ s o ccu p an t s h ad c o e r c e d h er to

cl ai m an d t ak e p o ss es s i o n of th e d ru gs an d t he d ru g p arap h ern al i a b y t h reat en i n g to

k i l l h er.

Th e ju ry fo u n d Gag e gu i l t y of t h e t raffi ck in g i n m et h am p h et am i n e ch arg e, b ut

n o t g u il t y o f t h e p os s es s i o n o f Tram ad o l ch arg e. 2 Fo l l o w i ng t h e d en i al o f h er m o t i o n

fo r n ew t ri al , Gag e fi l ed t h e i ns t an t ap p eal

.

2 W e n o te t hat t h e ev i d en ce was s u ffi ci en t t o s u s t ai n Gag e’ s co n v i ct i o n

. See

OCGA § 1 6 -1 3 -3 1 (e) (p ro v i d i n g t h at an y p ers o n wh o h as p os s es s i on o f 28 g ram s o r

m o r e o f m et h am

p het am i n e co m

m i t s t h e fel o n y o ffen se o f t raffi ck i n g in

m et h a m p h et am i n e); Co ok v. S t a t e , 2 2 6 Ga. Ap p. 1 1 3

, 1 1 4-1 1 5 (1 ) (4 8 5 SE2 d 5 9 5 ) (1 9 9 7) (t raffi ck i n g in m et h am p h et am in e co n v i ct i o n was au t ho ri zed b y ev i d en ce t h at

a p l as t i c b ag fi l l ed wi t h o v er 3 4 g ram s o f m et h am p h et am i ne w as p u l l ed fro m d efen d an t ’ s p an t s , n o t w i t hs t an d i n g defen d an t ’ s co n t en t i o n t h at t h e d ru g s b el o n g ed

t o h er co m

p an i o n ).

4Gag e co nt en d s t h at s h e i s en t i t led t o rel i ef fro m her co n v i ct i on becau s e h er t ri al

co u ns el p ro v i d ed i n effect iv e as s i s tan ce.

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

d efen d an t m

u s t s h o w t hat h i s co un s el ’ s perfo rm an ce was d efi ci en t an d

t h at t h e defi ci en t p erfo rm an ce s o preju d iced h i m t h at t h ere i s a

reas o n ab l e l ik el i h o o d th at

, b u t fo r co un s el ’ s erro rs , t h e o u t co m e o f t he

t ri al wo u l d hav e been d i fferen t

. S t r i ckl a n d v. W a s h i ng t o n , 4 6 6 U. S. 6 6 8

, 6 9 4 (III) (B) (1 0 4 SCt 2 0 5 2

, 8 0 LE2 d 6 7 4) (1 98 4 )

. . . . W e are n o t

req u ired t o ad d res s b o th t h e d efi ci en t p erfo rm an ce an d p reju di ce p ro n g s

o f t h e t es t i f t h e d efen d an t h as m ad e an i ns u ffi ci en t sh o w i n g o n ei t h er

o n e of t h em [.]

. . . Fu rt h er, we a c c e p t t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s fact u al fi n d i n g s

an d cred ib i l i t y d et erm i n at i o n s un l es s cl earl y erro n eo u s, b u t we

i n d ep en d en t l y

ap p ly t h e l eg al p ri n ci p l es t o t h e fact s

.

(Ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Bi gg i ns v. S t a t e , 32 2 G a. Ap p. 2 8 6

, 2 8 9 (3 ) (7 4 4

SE2 d 8 1 1 ) (2 0 1 3 ). Beari n g t h e s e p ri n ci p l es in m i n d

, we t u rn t o ad d res s Gag e’ s

cl ai m s

.

1

. Gag e fi rs t co n t en d s t h at h er t ri al co u n sel was i neffect i v e w h en h e fai l ed to

o b ject t o t h e St at e’ s an no u n cem en t reg ard in g p ret ri al p l ea o ffers

. Th e reco rd s h o ws

t h at p ri o r t o t h e co m

m en cem en t o f t h e t ri al

, an d o u ts id e th e p res en ce o f t he ju ry , t h e

p ro s ecu to r s t at ed o n t h e reco rd t h e t erm s o f t wo p l ea o ffers t h at t h e St at e h ad m ad e

t o G ag e, an d Gag e’ s t ri al co u n sel co n fi rm ed t hat Gag e h ad reject ed t h o s e offers

. At

5t h e m ot i o n fo r n ew t ri al h eari n g , t ri al co un s el t es t i fi ed th at h e d i d n o t o b ject t o t h i s

p ract i ce b ecau s e h e fel t t h at i t s p u rp o s e was t o p recl u d e an y p o t en t i al cl ai m t h at t h e

p l ea o ffers h ad n o t b een co n v ey ed

. Gag e n ev ert h el es s arg u es t h at t he an n o u n cem en t

was i m p erm i ss i b l e b ecau s e th e co n t e n t s o f p l ea neg o t i at i on s are co n fi d en t i al an d

s h o u ld n o t b e d i s cl o s ed t o t ri al ju d g es . W e d i s cern n o erro r.

At t h e o u t set

, we n o t e t h at i t i s co m m o n p ract i ce in Geo rg i a’ s st at e an d fed eral

p ro ceed in g s t o p lace p l ea o ffers o n t h e reco rd fo r p u rp o s e s o f co n fi rm i ng t h at t h e

o ffers h av e b een pro perl y co n v ey ed an d u n d ers t o o d b y d efen d an t s

. See, e.g ., S i l vey

v. St a t e , 3 3 5 G a. Ap p

. 3 8 3

, 3 9 3 (3 ) (a) (7 8 0 SE2 d 7 0 8 ) (2 0 1 5) (at a h eari ng , t h e t ri al

co u rt p u t o n t h e reco rd t h e St at e’ s o ffer t o s et tl e t h e cri m i n al ch arg es an d i n fo rm ed

d efen d an t of h i s s en t en ci ng ex p o s u re); S t a t e v. Lexi e , 3 3 1 G a

. A p p

. 4 0 0

, 4 0 1 (7 7 1

SE2 d 9 7 ) (2 0 1 5) (St at e an no u n ced p l ea o ffer at a h eari n g h el d b y t h e t ri al co u rt t o p ut

t h e p l e a o f

f er o n t h e reco rd ); Bi

g g in s , 3 2 2 Ga. A p p

. at 2 8 9 (3 ) (a) (p ro s ecu t o r

d i s cu s s ed p l ea o ffer wi t h th e t ri al co u rt on t he reco rd at t h e s tart o f t h e t ri al

, an d t h e

t ri al co u rt co nfi rm e d t h a t d efen d an t u n d ers to o d t h e sen t en ci n g ran g e an d t h e p l ea

o ffer); Po s l ey v. S ta t e , 2 6 4 Ga. Ap p

. 8 6 9

, 8 7 1 (1 ) (b ) (5 92 SE2 d 5 0 4 ) (2 0 0 3 ) (p ri o r

t o t ri al

, d efen s e co u n s el p l aced o n t h e reco rd hi s reci t at i o n o f t h e St at e’ s p l e a o f f e r

an d d efen d an t ’ s reject i o n o f t h a t o f f er, “ t o m ak e su re t he reco rd was cl ear” t h at

6d e f

en dan t h ad m ad e an i n fo rm ed ch o i ce t o g o to t ri al ). See al s o , e. g ., T u r n e r v

.

Ph i l b i n , 2 0 1 7 U.S. Di s t

. LEXIS 1 6 4 6 3 9

, at * 4 (N.D. Ga., M ar. 10

, 2 0 1 7 ) (o n t h e d ay

s ch ed u l ed fo r t ri al

, t h e St at e p l a ced i t s p lea o ffer o n t h e reco rd ); Un i t ed S t a t es v.

S t u ckey

, 20 1 5 U.S. Di st

. L EXIS 1 9 5 8 8 4

, a t *2 -3 (N.D. Ga., Dec. 2

, 2 0 1 5) (fed eral

p ro s ecu to r s t at ed p l ea offer o n t h e reco rd at a p ret ri al co n feren ce s o t h at “ t h e [c] o u rt

co u ld b e as s u red t h at [d ] efe n d a n t h ad b een ad v i s ed o f t h at o ffer[,] ” an d t h e co u rt

co n fi rm ed t h at d e f

e n d an t u n d ers t o o d t h e p l ea offer) (p u n ct u at i o n om i t t ed ); Y ea r b y

v. Un i t ed S t a t es , 2 00 5 U.S. Di s t. LEXIS 3 2 7 2 0

, at *1 1 -1 2 (M .D. Ga., J u n e 10

, 2 0 0 5 )

(fed eral p ro s ecu t o r p ut p lea o ffer on t h e reco rd at a p ret ri al c o n f e r e n c e h el d b y t h e

co u rt

, an d t h e ju dg e co nfi rm ed t h at d efen dan t u nd ers t o o d t h e p l e a o ffer); Ir i ck v.

Un i ted S t a t es , 2 0 10 U.S. Di s t . LEXIS 1 1 0 8 95 , at * 9 -1 0

, 1 4 -1 5 (M

. D. Ga., M ay 1 2,

2 0 1 0 ) (fed eral p ro s ecu t o r pu t p lea offer o n t h e reco rd at t h e b eg i n ni n g o f d efen d an t ’ s

s u p p res s i o n h eari n g , an d ex p l ai n ed t hat s h e d i d s o to co n fi rm t h at d efen d an t was

aware o f t h e p l ea o ffer an d co u l d n o t l at er cl ai m t h at t ri al co un s el d i d no t co n v ey i t ).

In s u p p o rt o f h er arg um en t ag ai ns t t h is p ract i ce, G ag e r e l i e s u p o n t h e

p ro v is i o n s o f OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 08 , wh i ch s t at e as fo l l o ws :

7(a) E x cep t as p ro v i d ed i n C o d e Sect i o n 9 -1 1 -6 8 [g o vern i n g th e

ev al uat io n o f o ffers o f s et t l em en t fo r p urp o s es o f award in g at t o rn ey fees

u n d er t h e Ci v il Pract ice Act ] , ev i d en ce o f:

(1 ) Fu rn i s h in g , o fferi n g, o r p ro m i s i n g t o fu rn i s h ; o r

(2 ) A c c e p ti n g , o fferi n g , o r p ro m i s i n g t o accep t a v al u ab l e

co n s i d erat i o n i n co m

p ro m i s i n g o r at t em

p t i ng t o co m

p ro m is e a cl ai m

w h i c h w as d is p u t ed as t o ei th er v al i di t y o r am o u nt s h al l n o t b e

ad m i s s i b l e t o pro v e l iab i l i t y fo r o r i n v al i d i t y o f an y cl ai m or i ts am o u nt

.

(b ) Ev i d en ce o f co n d u ct o r s tat em en t s m ad e in co m pro m i s e n eg ot i at i o n s

o r m ed i at i o n s hal l n o t b e ad m i ss i b le.

(c) Th i s Co d e s ect i on s hal l n o t r e q u i r e th e ex cl us i o n o f an y ev i d en ce

o t h erwi se d i s co v erab l e m erel y b ecau s e i t i s p res en t ed in t h e co u rs e o f

co m p ro m i s e n eg o t i at i on s o r m ed i at i o n

. Th i s Co d e s ect i o n s h al l n o t

req u ire ex cl u s i o n of ev i d en ce o ffered fo r an o t h er p u rp o s e, i nc luding, bu t

n o t l i m i t ed t o , p ro v i n g b i a s o r p reju di ce o f a wi tn es s , n eg at i n g a

co n t en t i o n o f u n d u e d el ay o r ab us e o f p ro ces s , o r p ro v in g an effo rt t o

o b s t ru ct a cri m i n al i n v es t i g at i o n o r p ro s ecu ti o n

.

Th i s ru l e was en act ed as p art of o u r new Ev i d e n ce Co d e, wh i ch b ecam e

effect i v e o n J an uary 1, 2 0 1 3

. 3 See Ga. L. 2 0 11 , p

. 9 9

, §2

. In en act in g t he n ew ru l es

3 Un d er Geo rg i a’ s fo rm er Ev i d en ce Co de, t h e co rres p on d i n g ru l e b arri n g t h e ad m i s s i b i l i t y o f s et t l em en t di scu s s i o n s d id n o t ap p l y t o cri m i n al cas es

. See Mo o r e v. S t a t e , 2 3 0 Ga. 8 3 9

, 8 3 9 -8 4 0 (1 ) (1 9 9 SE2 d 2 43 ) (1 9 73 ) (d eci d ed u n d er fo rm er Co d e

8o f ev i d en ce, t h e G e o r g i a L eg i s l at u re ex p res s ed a cl ear i n ten t to “ ad o p t [ ]

, i n l arg e

m eas u re, t h e Fed eral Ru l es o f Ev i den ce.” Ga. L. 2 0 1 1

, p

. 1

, §1

. Becau s e o ur St at e’ s

ap p el l at e co u rt s h av e n ot p rev io u s l y d eci d ed th i s i s s ue u nd er o ur n ew Ev i d en ce Co de,

“ w e l o o k t o d eci si o ns o f t h e fed eral ap pel l at e co u rt s co n st ru i n g an d ap p l y i n g t h e

Fed eral Ru l es , es peci al l y th e d eci s i o n s o f t h e Un i t ed St at es Su p rem e Co u rt an d t h e

El ev en th Ci rcu i t .” (Ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i tt ed

. ) S t a te v. Bu r n s , 3 0 6 Ga. 1 1 7,

1 2 5 (3 ) (8 2 9 SE2 d 36 7 ) (2 0 1 9 ); s ee al so An d er s on v. S t a t e , 3 0 7 G a. 7 9, 84 (3 ) (b ), n.

1 4 (8 3 4 SE2 d 8 3 0 ) (2 0 1 9 ) (wh en a s t at u t e of Geo rg i a ’s n e w E v i d en ce Co d e i s

m at eri al l y i d en t ical to t h e Fed eral Ru l es o f Ev i d en ce, we l o o k t o fed eral cas e l aw wi th

res p ect t o t h e i n t erp ret at i o n an d ap p l i cat i o n o f th e ru le, “ ev en t h o u g h [Geo rg i a’ s n ew

s t at u te] is al s o m at eri al l y i d en t ical t o i t s p red eces so r u n d er t h e o l d Ev i d en ce Co d e”)

(ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ); Ba sh i r v. S t a t e , 3 5 0 G a. Ap p

. 8 5 2

, 8 57 (3 ) (8 3 0

SE2 d 3 5 3 ) (2 0 1 9 ) ( w h e n a ru l e un d er G eo rg i a’ s n ew Ev i d en ce Co d e m at eri al l y

m i rro rs i ts fed eral co un t erp art

, “ we m u s t l o o k to fed eral ap p el lat e p rec e d e n t [u n t i l ]

1 9 3 3

, § 3 8 -4 0 8

, wh i ch p ro v i ded t h at “ ad m i s s i o ns o r pro p o s i t i o n s m ad e wi t h a v i ew

t o a co m p ro m i s e, are n ot p ro p er ev i d en ce”); W i l l i a ms v. S t a t e , 1 7 8 Ga. Ap p

. 2 1 6

, 2 1 7 (1 ) (3 4 2 SE2 d 70 3 ) (1 9 8 6 ) (d eci d ed u n d er fo rm er OCGA § 2 4-3 -3 7

, wh i ch p ro v i d ed

t h at ad m is s i on s m ad e wi t h a v iew t o wa r d s c o m p r om i s e were n ot pro p er ev i d en ce).

Bu t t h is cas e was t ri ed i n J an u ary 2 0 19 u n d er o u r n ew Ev id en ce Co d e.

9a G eo rg i a ap p el l at e co u rt has d eci d ed t h e i s s u e u n d er th e new E v i d en ce Co d e”)

(ci t at i o n an d p u nct u at io n o m i t ted ). 4

Th e E l e v e n t h Ci rcu i t h as h el d t h at t h e fed eral co u n t erp art

, Ru l e 40 8

, ap p li es

t o b o t h ci v i l an d cri m i n al cas es

. See Un i t ed S t a t es v. Ar i a s , 4 31 F3 d 13 2 7

, 1 3 3 6 -1 3 3 8

(II) (E) (1 1 t h Ci r. 2 00 5 ). 5 Accep t in g arg u en d o t h at OC G A § 2 4 -4 -4 0 8 ap p l i es in

4 See Fl a d i n g v. S t a t e , 3 2 7 Ga. Ap p

. 3 46

, 3 4 9 (1 ), n.4 (7 59 SE2 d 6 7 ) (2 0 1 4 ) (n o t i ng t h at p ro v i s i o n s o f OCGA § 2 4-4 -4 0 8 t rack Fed eral Ru l e o f Ev i d en ce 4 0 8 ).

5 Ar i a s was d eci d ed p ri o r t o t h e 2 00 6 am en d m en t t o Ru l e 40 8

. No t ab l y , OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 08 is m o re co n s i st en t wi th t h at pri o r v ers io n o f Ru le 4 0 8 t h an t h e cu rren t

v ers i on . Su ch pri o r v ers i o n o f Ru l e 4 0 8 p ro v i d ed i n fu l l : Ev i d en ce o f (1 ) fu rn i s h i n g o r o fferi n g o r p ro m i s i n g t o fu rn i s h

, or (2 )

accep t i n g o r offeri n g o r p ro m i s i n g t o accep t

, a v al u ab l e co ns i d erat i o n i n

co m p ro m is i n g o r at t em

p t i n g t o co m

p ro m i s e a cl ai m wh i ch was d i sp u ted

as t o ei t h er v al i d i t y o r am o u n t

, i s n o t ad m i s s i b l e t o p ro v e l i ab il i ty fo r o r i n v al i d i t y o f t h e cl ai m or i t s am ou n t

. Ev i d en ce o f co n d u ct o r st at em en t s

m ad e i n co m

p ro m i s e n eg o t i at i o n s i s l i k ewi s e n o t ad m i ss i b l e. Th i s ru l e d o es n o t req ui re th e ex cl u s i o n o f an y ev id en ce ot h erwi s e di s co verab l e

m erel y becau s e i t i s p res en t ed i n t h e co urs e o f co m p ro m i s e n eg o t i at i o ns

. Th i s ru l e al s o d o es n o t req u i re ex cl u s i o n wh en t h e ev i d en ce is o ffered

fo r an o t h er p u rp os e, s u ch as p r o v i n g b i as o r preju d ice o f a wi t n es s ,

n eg at i v i n g a co n t en t i o n o f u n d u e d el ay , o r pro v in g an effo rt t o o b s t ru ct
a cri m i n al i nv es t i g at io n o r p ro s ecu t i o n

.

Th r ea t t e v. To

yo ta Mo t or Co r

p

. , 2 0 0 6 U.S. Di s t

. LEXIS 1 03 0 1 2

, at * 4 4 n .1 9 (SD Ga.,

M ay 2, 2 0 0 6 ); s ee McA u l i f f e v

. Un i t ed S t a t es , 5 1 4 Fed

. A p p x

. 5 4 2, 54 9 (6 t h Ci r. 2 0 1 3 ) (s et t i n g o u t th e fo rm er v ers i on o f Ru l e 4 0 8

, an d n ot i ng t h at “ [a] 2 0 0 6 ru l e

am en d m en t

. . . co n cl u s i v el y s e t t l ed a ci rcu i t sp l i t i n fav o r o f ap pl y i n g Ru l e 4 0 8 in

cri m i n al cas es ”); s ee al s o Un it ed S t a t es v. Da vi s , 5 9 6 F3 d 8 5 2, 8 60

, n

. 6 (D.C. Ci r. 2 0 1 0 ) (n o t i n g t h at t h e ci rcu it s h ad b een s pl i t o n wh et her t h e ru l e ap p li ed t o b o t h ci v i l

10cri m i n al cas es , 6 th at Co d e s ect i o n d o es n o t o p erat e t o p recl u d e wh at i s co nt es t ed h ere

– p ut t i n g t h e t erm s o f t h e reject ed p l ea o ffers o n t h e reco rd , p ret ri al an d o u t s i d e t h e

p res en ce o f th e ju ry

. A s Gag e’ s t ri al co un s el ex pl ai ned at t he new t ri al h eari n g , s u ch

an n ou n cem en t was m ad e fo r t h e p u rp o s e o f es t ab l i s h i ng t h at t h e p l ea o ffers h ad b een

co n vey ed an d reject ed

. See g en eral l y OCGA § 2 4

- 4

- 4 0 8 (c) (p ro vi d in g a n o n

an d cri m i n al p ro ceed i n g s , b ut t h at a 2 0 0 6 am en d m en t t o Ru l e 4 0 8 m ad e cl ear t h at t h e

ru l e ap p l ied t o b o t h t y

p es o f pro ceed in g s ). Acco rd Hi l l

, Ker t s ch er & W

h a r t o n

, LLP

v. Mo o d y , 3 08 Ga. 7 4

, 7 8 (2 ), n .2 (8 3 9 SE2 d 5 3 5) (2 0 2 0 ) (“ [W ]h e n t h e G en eral

As s em b l y co m p reh en s i v el y an d ex h au s ti v el y rev i s ed th e d is co v ery p ro v i s i on s o f t h e Ci v il Pract i ce Act i n 1 9 7 2

, OCGA § 9 -1 1

- 2 6 w a s vi rt u al l y i d en t i cal t o t h e

co rres p o n d i n g fed eral ru l e t h en i n effect , s o cas es an d co m m en t ary i n terp ret i n g t h e l an g u ag e u s ed i n t h e 1 97 0 v ers i o n o f t h e fed era l d i s c o v ery ru l es are t h erefo re

p ers u as i v e au t h o ri t y in i n t erp ret i n g Geo rg i a’ s d i s co v e r y s t at u tes .”) (ci tat i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ); Bo wd en v. M ed

. Cen t er , 2 9 7 Ga. 2 8 5, 2 9 1 (2 ) (a), n .5 (7 7 3

SE2 d 6 9 2 ) (2 0 1 5 ) (ex p l ai n i n g t h at t h o s e cas es an d co m m en t ary i nt erp ret i n g t h e l an g u ag e u s e d i n t h e 1 9 7 0 v ers i o n o f t h e fed eral d i s co v ery ru l es w ere p ers u as i v e

au t h o ri t y i n i n t erp ret in g t h e Geo rg i a d i s co v ery s t at u t e at i s s u e, b ecau se s u ch Geo rg i a

s t at u te was “ v i rt u al l y i den t i cal t o t h e co rres po n d i n g fed eral ru l e t h at was i n effect in

1 9 7 2 ”).

6 Th e St at e as s ert s t h at G ag e’ s cl ai m is m ore ap t l y g o v ern ed b y OCGA § 2 4 -4

- 4 1 0 (4 ), wh i ch p ro v i des th at “ [a] n y s t at em en t m ad e in th e co u rs e o f p l ea d i s cu s s i on s wi t h an at t o rn ey fo r t h e p ro s ecu t i n g au t h o ri t y wh i ch d o es n o t r e s u l t i n a p l ea o f

g u i l t y ” s h al l n o t b e ad m is s i b l e ag ai n s t a cri m i n al d efen d an t in an y ju d i ci al

p ro ce e d i n g

. See gen eral l y Es p r i t v. S t at e , 3 0 5 Ga. 4 2 9, 4 3 5 (2 ) (c) (8 2 6 SE2 d 7 ) (2 0 1 9) (ci t i n g OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 1 0 o f Geo rg ia’ s n ew Ev id en ce Co d e as “ g ov ern i n g t h e ad m i s s i b i l i t y o f p l eas , p l ea di scu s s i o n s , a n d rel at ed st at em en t s”). Gag e m ak es n o

arg u m en t u n d er OCGA § 2 4 -4 -4 1 0 , h o wev er. W e n eed n o t reach t hat i s s u e.

11ex h au s t i v e s et o f ci rcu m s t an ces t o wh i ch t h e Co d e s ect io n d o es no t req u i re

ex cl u s i o n ).

M o reo v er, co n trary t o G ag e’ s arg um en t

, t h e tri al co u rt d i d no t i m p erm i s s i b l y

p art i ci p at e i n p l ea d i scu ss io n s i n v i o l at i o n o f Un i fo rm Su p eri o r Co urt Ru l e 3 3 .5 (A)

d u ri n g th e ci ted pret ri al pro ced u re. See Gi d d en s v. S ta t e , 3 4 9 Ga. Ap p. 3 9 2

, 3 9 7 -3 9 8

(2 ) (8 2 5 SE2 d 82 4 ) ( 2 0 1 9 ) ( r e ject i ng arg u m en t t h at t h e t ri al co u rt i m p erm i s s i b l y

p art i ci p at ed i n t h e p l ea d i s cu s s io n s b y co nd u ct in g p ret ri al i n -ch am b ers p ro ceed i ng s

t h at p l aced o n t h e reco rd t he St at e’ s p l ea offer, d efen d an t ’ s reject i o n o f t h e o ffer, an d

t h e s en t en ci ng ran g e fo r t h e ch arg ed o ffen s es ).

In s u m , t he act of p l aci n g t h e reject ed p l ea o ff e r s o n t h e reco rd d u ri n g t h e

p ret ri al p ro ceed in g s di d n ot v i o l a t e t h e ci t ed ev i d en t i ary an d p ro ced u ral ru l es

.

“ Fai l u re to m ak e a m eri t les s o b j ect i o n can n o t b e ev id en ce o f i n effect iv e as s i s t an ce.”

(Fo o tn o te o m i t t ed .) Po s l ey , 2 6 4 Ga. Ap p

. at 8 71 (1 ) (b ). Co n s eq u en t l y , Gag e’ s

i n effect i v e as s is t an ce cl ai m fai l s

.

2

. Gag e fu rt h er arg u es th at t ri al co u n s el erred in fai l i ng t o o b ject wh en t h e t ri al

co u rt d i d n o t i m

p o s e a red u ced s en ten ce p urs u an t t o OCGA § 1 6 -1 3 -3 1 (g ). Ag ai n,

n o b as is fo r rev ers al h as b een s h o w n

.

12Gag e w as s en t en ced t o t wen ty y ears , to s erv e t h e m an d at o ry m i n i m u m t erm o f

i m p ri s o n m e n t o f t en y ears , an d a fi n e o f $ 2 00 ,0 0 0

. 0 0 fo r th e t raffi ck i n g in

m et h am p h et am i ne offen s e. See OCGA § 1 6 -1 3 -3 1 (e) (1 ) (co ncern i n g t h e m an d at o ry

m i n i m u m s en t en ci n g ran g e wh ere defen dan t p o ss es s ed at l eas t 28

, bu t l es s t h an 2 0 0

g ram s o f m et ham

p h et am i n e).

In t h e co u r t ’ s d i s cret i on , t h e ju d g e m ay d ep art fro m t h e m an d at o ry

m i n i m u m sen ten ce[ 7 ] s peci fi ed fo r a p ers o n wh o i s co n v i ct ed o f a

v i o l at i o n o f t h i s Co d e s ect i o n . . . i f t h e ju dg e co n cl u d es t h at :

(i ) Th e d efen d an t was n o t a l ead er o f t he cri m i n al co n d uct ; (i i ) Th e d efen d an t d i d n ot p o s s es s or u s e a fi r earm , d an g ero u s

weap o n , o r h azard o u s o b

ject d uri n g t h e cri m e; (i i i ) Th e cri m i n al co n d u ct d i d n o t r es ul t i n a d eat h o r s eri o u s

b od i l y i n ju ry t o a p ers o n o t h er t h an t o a pers o n wh o is a p art y t o

t h e cri m e; (i v ) Th e d efen dan t h as n o p ri o r fel on y co n v i ct i o n ; an d

( v ) T h e i n t eres t s o f ju s t ice wi l l no t b e s erv ed by t h e im po s it i o n o f t h e

p res cri b ed m an d at o ry m i n i m u m s en t en ce.

OCGA § 1 6 -1 3 -3 1 (g ) (2 ) (A). Here, o n ly t h e fi ft h fact o r was i n d is p u te.

7 Th e sen t en ci n g d ep art u re r a n g e fo r Gag e’ s t raffi ck i n g m et h am p h et am i n e

o ffen s e wo u l d h av e b een “ fi v e t o t en y ears i m p ri s o nm en t an d a fi n e o f n o t l es s t h an $ 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 n o r m o re t h an $ 2 0 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 [.] ” OCGA § 1 6 -1 3-3 1 (g ) (2 ) (B) (i v ).

13No t ab l y , h o wev er, OCGA § 1 6 -1 3 -3 1 (g ) (2 ) (A) d o es n o t req u i re t h e t ri al co u rt

t o d ep art fro m t h e m an d at o ry m i n i m u m s en t en ce ev en i f i t fi n d s t h e p res en ce o f a l l

fi ve fact o rs

. Reed v. S ta t e , 3 42 Ga. Ap p

. 46 6

, 4 69 (8 0 4 SE2 d 1 29 ) (2 01 7 ). In d eed

, we

h av e reco g ni zed t h at a d et erm i n at i o n o f t h e fi ft h fact o r i s s u b ject iv e. Id

. “ Ap p l i cat i o n

o f an in t eres t o f ju s t i ce s t an d ard t o t h e p ecu l iar ci rcu m s tan ces o f a part i cu l ar cas e i s

a m at t er co m

m i t t ed t o t h e s o u n d d i s cret i o n o f th e t ri al c o u r t [ .]” ( Ci t at i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed .) Id . at 4 6 9

.

“ In t he ab s en ce o f an y affi rm at i v e sh o wi n g t o t h e co n t rary , t h e [t ri al ] co u rt i s

p res u m ed t o h av e ex erci s ed i t s d i scret i o n i n i m po s in g s en t e n c e

. ” (Ci t at i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed

. ) S

m i t h v. S t a t e , 2 6 9 Ga. Ap p

. 5 0 6

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

(2 0 0 4). H ere, t here has b een n o affi rm at i v e s h o wi ng t hat t h e t ri al ju dg e was u n aware

o f h is d i scret i o n to d ev i at e fro m t h e s en t en ci n g ran g e i n acco rd an ce wi t h O CGA § 1 6

-

1 3 -3 1 (g ). In d eed

, t he St at e arg u ed t h at d ev i at i o n fro m t he m an d at o ry m i n i m u m

s en t en ce was n o t warran ted b ecau s e Gag e n ev er accep t ed res p o n s i b il i t y fo r h er

act i on s i n p os ses s i n g 5 2 .9 3 8 g ram s o f m et h am p het am i n e, w h i ch far ex ceed ed t h e

m i n i m u m s t at u t o ry t raffi ck i ng am o u n t

. 8 “ [A] d efen d an t ’ s l ack o f rem o rs e as refl ect ed

8 In p ro n ou n ci n g t h e s en t en ce, th e t ri al j u d ge ex p l ai n ed t h at h e had “ h eard [Gag e’ s ] s t o ry at t h e t im e o f t h e t ri al

. Th e ju ry d i d [,] t o o

. ” Gag e’ s cl ai m s of i nn o cen ce

were reject ed

, as refl ect ed b y t h e g ui l t y verd i ct an d s en t en ce. No t ab l y , t he t ri al ju d g e

14b y h i s fai l u re t o ad m i t t h e cri m e o f wh i ch h e was co n v ict ed

. . . i s a p erm i s si b l e area

o f i n q u i ry d u r i n g s en t en ci n g

. ” (Ci t at i o n , p u n ct uat i o n , an d fo o t n o t es o m i t t ed .)

McGu ir e v. S t a t e , 2 43 Ga. Ap p . 8 9 9

, 9 0 2 (5 ) (5 3 4 SE2 d 5 4 9 ) (2 0 00 ).

Bas ed o n t h e ci rcu m st an ces o f th i s cas e, Gag e h as n o t s h o wn th at s h e was

en t i t l ed t o a s en t en ce th at d ev i at ed fro m t h e m an d at o ry m i n i m u m u n d er OCGA §

1 6 -1 3-3 1 (g ) (2 ) (A). See, e

. g

. , R e e d

, 3 42 Ga. Ap p. at 46 9 -4 7 0 (d ev i at i o n fro m t h e

m an d at o ry m i n i m

u m s en t en ce i s n o t req u i red

, b u t rat h er, i s di scret io n ary ev en wh en

al l fi ve fact o rs o f OCGA § 16 -1 3 -3 1 (g ) (2 ) (A) are p res en t ). A n d “ i n t h e ab s en ce o f

affi rm at i v e ev id en ce s h owi n g t h at t h e t ri al co u rt b el i ev ed i t h ad n o d i s cret i o n [i n

i m p o s i n g t h e s en t en ce]

, we d i s cern n o p reju d i ce cau s ed by t ri al co u n s el ’ s co n d u ct .”

Tu r nb u l l v. S t a t e , 3 1 7 Ga. A p p

. 7 1 9

, 7 2 8 ( 2 ) (d ) (7 3 2 SE2 d 78 6 ) (2 0 1 2 ). See al s o

Mi l l er v. S t a te

, 3 5 1 Ga. Ap p

. 7 5 7

, 7 7 0 (2 ) (b ) (8 3 3 SE2 d 1 42 ) (2 0 1 9) (b ecau s e t h ere

was n o co g n i zab l e r i g h t t o a d i fferen t s en t en ce, d efen dan t fai l ed t o sh o w ei t h er

d efi ci en t p erfo rm an ce b y t r i a l c o u n s el o r a reas o n ab l e p ro b ab i li t y t h at t h e o u t co m e

wo u l d h av e b een d ifferen t i f t h e s en t en ci n g i s s ue h ad b een t im el y rai sed ).

al s o reject ed Gag e’ s req u es t fo r Fi rs t Offen d er t reat m en t b y s t at i ng , “ [I] d o n ’ t s ee t h i s i s a g o o d cas e fo r t hat .”

15Becau s e G ag e has s h o wn n o m eri t i n h er i n effect i v en es s cl ai m , s h e h as

es t ab l i s h ed n o b as i s t o d i s t urb t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d en i al o f h er m o t i o n fo r a n ew t ri al

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Go b ei l

a n d Pi p ki n

, JJ., co n cu r

.

16