Robinson v. State

• Decision Date: 13 November 2014
• Docket Number: No. A14A0812.,A14A0812.
• Citation: 329 Ga.App. 562,765 S.E.2d 715
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
• Parties: ROBINSON v. The STATE.

329 Ga.App. 562

765 S.E.2d 715

ROBINSON

v.The STATE.

No. A14A0812.

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Nov. 13, 2014.

Sheueli Cindy Wang, for Appellant.

Frances C. Kuo, Asst. Dist. Atty., Lawrenceville, Tracy Graham–Lawson, Dist. Atty., for Appellee.

Opinion

McFADDEN, Judge.

Appellant Shaheed Robinson was indicted and tried before a jury for aggravated assault and aggravated battery of two alleged victims. He was acquitted of aggravated battery as to both but convicted of aggravated assault of one of them. The trial court granted a mistrial on the count alleging aggravated assault of the second alleged victim. Robinson appeals his conviction, arguing that trial counsel was ineffective. Specifically, he argues that trial counsel should have objected to a detective's testimony about a non-testifying co-defendant's statement. Because Robinson has not shown that there is a reasonable probability that the outcome of the proceeding would have been different had trial counsel handled the detective's testimony in another manner, he has not shown ineffective assistance of counsel. We therefore affirm.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, Morris v. State, 322 Ga.App. 682(1), 746 S.E.2d 162 (2013), the evidence shows that Robinson, co-defendant Timothy Amey, and the second alleged victim were at a club together. After leaving the club, the second alleged victim brought Robinson and Amey to his residence, where the victim also lived. The four men used cocaine and drank alcohol.

Eventually, the second alleged victim drove Robinson and Amey to Amey's apartment, and the victim rode along. When the four men arrived at the complex, the victim asked Amey if he could use the bathroom. Amey answered yes, and he and Robinson led the victim up the back stairs toward Amey's apartment. The second alleged victim waited in the car. As they reached the apartment, Amey turned around and began stabbing the victim with a 12–inch carving knife. The victim turned, and Robinson began stabbing him, too. The victim required immediate surgery, he was in intensive care for three weeks, and he was in the hospital for two months.

Amey and Robinson returned to the car and began stabbing the second alleged victim who had been waiting there. The second alleged victim sustained a laceration to his liver, two puncture wounds to his stomach, and eight lacerations on his arms. The second alleged victim testified that Robinson sent him letters from jail, asking for forgiveness, explaining that he was a follower, not a leader, and asking him not to show up for court.

Both the victim and the second alleged victim identified Amey and Robinson in photographic line-ups, and both identified Robinson in court as one of the men who stabbed them.

The state presented the testimony of Detective Chris Helton who interviewed Amey. Detective Helton testified that Amey told him that Amey was in the car when the incident occurred, that “Mr. Robinson had stabbed both of them[,] and that he was just there as basically a witness and they ran off.” On cross-examination, defense counsel confirmed with Detective Helton that Amey had told him that Robinson “actually did the stabbing; that he didn't do anything.”

Robinson's recorded interview was played for the jury. During the interview, Detective Jeffery Gant told Robinson that Amey admitted stabbing the passenger, but said that Robinson had stabbed the driver. Robinson eventually admitted that he had a knife during the incident and described in some detail where he and Amey had thrown the knives. He explained that he and Amey had planned to rob the men. And Robinson himself explained why Amey believed Robinson stabbed the men: he told Amey he had done so. Robinson testified at trial that he and Amey fought the men, but that he did not remember having a knife.

Robinson and Amey were indicted for the aggravated battery and aggravated assault of the victim and the second alleged victim. Amey's trial was severed from Robinson's, and Amey later pleaded guilty. Robinson now appeals from his aggravated assault conviction.

To prevail on his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Robinson must show both deficient performance by trial counsel and actual prejudice. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687(III), 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) ; Smith v. Francis, 253 Ga. 782, 783(1), 325 S.E.2d 362 (1985). The burden on Robinson to make this showing is a heavy one, Wingate v. State, 296 Ga. 21, 28(3), 764 S.E.2d 833 (2014), and if he “fails to meet his burden of proving either prong, then we do not need to examine the other prong.” Works v. State, 301 Ga.App. 108, 114(7),...