Hampton v. State

295 Ga. 665 (2014) · Supreme Court of Georgia · September 22, 2014 · No. S14A0768

Summary

The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed Cleo Roosevelt Hampton, Jr.'s convictions for malice murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of murder, rejecting his ineffective-assistance claim. The court held that Hampton lacked standing to suppress subpoenaed text messages because he had not shown a sufficient privacy interest in the phone account, and further concluded that counsel's decision to use the messages was reasonable trial strategy and caused no prejudice.

Court
Supreme Court of Georgia
Writing for the Court
Hines, Presiding Justice; Nahmias, Justice; All the Justices
Jurisdiction
Georgia
Decision date
September 22, 2014
Docket number
S14A0768
Procedural posture
Appeal from the denial of an amended motion for new trial following convictions for malice murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of murder. Hampton alleged that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to seek suppression of subpoenaed text messages.
Standard of review
The court accepted the trial court's factual findings and credibility determinations unless clearly erroneous and independently applied the governing legal principles to the facts. Ineffective-assistance claims were analyzed under the deficient-performance and prejudice requirements of Strickland v. Washington.
Precedential value
binding
Parties
Cleo Roosevelt Hampton, Jr. v. The State
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

ineffective assistancesuppression of evidencefourth amendmentsearch and seizurecriminal procedure

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal procedureappellate practiceconstitutional law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to move to suppress subpoenaed text messages under federal and Georgia electronic-communications statutes.
  2. Whether Hampton had a sufficient privacy or statutory interest in the phone account and communications to establish standing to seek suppression.
  3. Whether, even if counsel performed deficiently, there was a reasonable probability that exclusion of the text messages would have changed the trial outcome.

Holdings

  1. Hampton lacked standing to seek suppression because he presented no evidence that he owned, controlled, or had a legally sufficient privacy interest in the cell-phone account, which was subscribed to by Terric White.
  2. Trial counsel was not deficient for failing to file a meritless suppression motion.
  3. Counsel's decision not to object to the text messages was a reasonable strategic decision and did not constitute deficient performance.
  4. Hampton failed to establish a reasonable probability that the trial result would have been different without the text messages.
  5. Although Hampton did not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence, the court independently concluded that the evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Key quotations

a criminal defendant has standing to suppress evidence obtained through an illegal search or seizure only in the situation in which his or her own rights are violated, as such rights are personal and are not to be asserted vicariously. (669)
the failure to make a meritless motion or objection does not provide a basis upon which to find ineffective assistance of counsel. (670)
hindsight has no place in an assessment of the performance of trial counsel (670)

Factual background

Hampton and Brownlee went to Jared Taylor's home under the pretense of selling him a handgun, and Taylor was later found fatally shot. Evidence connected Hampton to the crime, including his statements to police, his presence at the scene, his participation in planning a robbery, his receipt and use of stolen money, surveillance footage, shoe-print evidence, and phone communications with Brownlee. Subpoenaed records from a phone subscribed to by Terric White contained text messages and calls between Hampton and Brownlee.

Procedural history

A Clayton County grand jury indicted Hampton and Darion Cortez Brownlee on murder, robbery, aggravated assault, firearm, and related charges. After a jury trial from March 26 through March 29, 2012, Hampton was convicted on all charges and received life imprisonment with the possibility of parole for malice murder plus a consecutive five-year sentence for firearm possession during the commission of murder; other verdicts were vacated or merged for sentencing. The trial court denied Hampton's motion for new trial, as amended, and the Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…