Stodghill v. State
| Decision Date | 06 September 2019 |
| Docket Number | A19A1620 |
| Citation | 351 Ga.App. 744,832 S.E.2d 891 |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
| Parties | STODGHILL v. The STATE. |
351 Ga.App. 744
832 S.E.2d 891
STODGHILL
v.
The STATE.
A19A1620
Court of Appeals of Georgia.
September 6, 2019
James Allan Rogers, Trenton, for Appellant.
Layla Hinton Zon, District Attorney, for Appellee.
McFadden, Chief Judge.
After a jury trial, Zane Stodghill was convicted of five counts of aggravated child molestation, five counts of aggravated sodomy, and three counts of enticing a child for indecent purposes. The trial court denied Stodghill’s motion for new trial, and he appeals. Stodghill argues that the evidence does not support the convictions, that the trial court erred by denying a competency evaluation, and that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to ask for a continuance. We hold that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, that the trial court did not err by denying a competency evaluation, and that trial counsel was not ineffective. So we affirm.
1. Facts .
"On appeal from a criminal conviction, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, with the defendant no longer enjoying a presumption of innocence." Garza v. State , 347 Ga. App. 335 (1), 819 S.E.2d 497 (2018) (citation and punctuation omitted). We do not weigh the evidence or judge the credibility of witnesses, but determine only whether,
after viewing the evidence in the light most
favorable to the prosecution, "any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt." Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U. S. 307, 319 (III) (B), 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979) (emphasis omitted).
So viewed, the evidence showed that the victims were three brothers, twins who were nine years old at the time of their outcries and their younger brother, who was eight years old at the time of his outcry. Stodghill’s mother occasionally watched the boys while their father was at work, sometimes overnight. Stodghill would bring the boys into his bedroom, where he would force them to perform oral sex upon him and anally penetrate them with his penis. Stodghill threatened to hurt them if they told anyone about the abuse.
The boys disclosed the abuse to a neighbor couple who watched them. The couple notified the boys’ father, who took them to a child advocacy center where they were interviewed. Recordings of their interviews were played for the jury and the boys testified at trial.
Stodghill argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions because it consisted exclusively of the victims’ testimony, which was not credible given certain discrepancies. We disagree because
the testimony of a single witness is generally sufficient to establish a fact. And, to the extent that any witness’ testimony was inconsistent or contradicted, we note that it is the function of the jury — not this [c]ourt — to resolve such conflicts in the evidence. The jury clearly resolved the conflicts against [Stodghill] and we will not disturb the jury’s findings on appeal.
McGhee v. State , 263 Ga. App. 762, 763 (1), 589 S.E.2d 333 (2003) (citations and punctuation omitted). See OCGA §§ 16-6-2 (a) (2) (defining aggravated sodomy), 16-6-4 (c) (defining aggravated child molestation), 16-6-5 (a) (defining enticing a child for indecent purposes).
2. Competency evaluation.
Stodghill argues that the trial court erred in denying his counsel’s pretrial request for a competency evaluation of Stodghill. We disagree.
The record shows that the week before the trial, defense counsel made an oral request for a continuance and for a mental health evaluation of Stodghill’s competency. Counsel explained that Stodghill was low functioning and that he had been completely uncommunicative at a meeting the week before. The trial judge began questioning Stodghill, asking if he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Miller v. State
...alleged in the indictment. Her testimony, alone, was sufficient to support Miller's convictions. See Stodghill v. State , 351 Ga. App. 744, 745 (1), 832 S.E.2d 891 (2019) (victims’ testimony alone was sufficient to support convictions for offenses including enticing a child for indecent pur......
-
Smith v. State
...show that she was prejudiced by trial counsel's failure to request an additional psychiatric examination); Stodghill v. State , 351 Ga. App. 744, 747-48 (3), 832 S.E.2d 891 (2019) (holding that defense counsel's failure to persist in requesting competency evaluation after trial court denied......
-
Longo v. City of Dunwoody
... ... We find that the facts presented herein are remarkably similar to those presented in this Court's opinion in Hatcher v. State , 23 in which the defendant was charged with multiple counts of child molestation. 24 In Hatcher , the defendant repeatedly told the trial ... ...
-
Montgomery v. State
...the deficiency, there is a reasonable probability that the outcome of the trial would have been different." Stodghill v. State , 351 Ga. App. 744, 747 (3), 832 S.E.2d 891 (2019) (citation and punctuation omitted). Montgomery has failed to show prejudice, so his ineffectiveness claim fails a......