Summary
The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed Joseph Washington’s convictions for malice murder and firearm offenses. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a mistrial based on juror exposure to a newspaper article and that trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the prosecutor’s closing argument or for insisting that a videotaped statement be played in its entirety.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the evidence was sufficient to support Washington's convictions.
- Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying a mistrial after jurors read a newspaper article summarizing the first day of trial.
- Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to a prosecutor's closing argument allegedly commenting on Washington's failure to testify.
- Whether trial counsel was ineffective for insisting that the entire videotaped statement of a prosecution witness be played for the jury.
Holdings
- The evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find Washington guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crimes for which he was convicted.
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Washington's motion for a mistrial after jurors read a newspaper article summarizing the first day of trial.
- Washington did not establish ineffective assistance because the prosecutor's statement about the time of the crime was not an improper comment on Washington's failure to testify, so counsel was not deficient for failing to object.
- Washington failed to prove prejudice from counsel's decision to insist that the entire videotape be played, even assuming the decision was an unreasonable tactical choice.
Key quotations
“When a defendant contends that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel, the defendant has the burden to show that trial counsel provided deficient representation and that, but for that deficient representation, it is reasonably probable that the outcome of the proceedings would have been different.” (at 724)
“In determining whether a prosecutor has improperly commented on an accused’s failure to testify, we must evaluate whether “the prosecutor’s manifest intention was to comment on the accused’s failure to testify” or whether “the remark was of such a character that a jury would naturally and necessarily take it to be a comment on the accused’s failure to testify.”” (at 724)
Factual background
Craig Fields testified that he saw Washington shoot Jarvis Maxwell multiple times from approximately twelve feet away before fleeing in a car. Maxwell died from nine gunshot wounds. Washington's girlfriend testified that Washington gave her a gun shortly before his arrest, and forensic evidence established that Washington's fingerprints were on the gun and that bullets and shell casings from the crime scene and victim were fired from it. During trial, a juror brought a newspaper article summarizing the first day's proceedings into the jury room, and each juror read or scanned part or all of it.
Procedural history
A jury found Washington guilty on June 12, 2003, of malice murder, two counts of felony murder, possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The felony murder convictions were vacated as a matter of law, and the trial court imposed a life sentence without parole for murder and five-year sentences for both possession offenses. After the trial court denied Washington's amended motion for new trial, he appealed to the Supreme Court of Georgia; the appeal was submitted on briefs on February 28, 2005.