☢ test - Í

39. DIRECTED VERDICT, FAILURE TO SEEK Chapman v. State, 318 Ga.App. 514, 733 S.E.2d 848 (November 2, 2012). Convictions for attempted burglary and attempted rape affirmed, no ineffective assistance for failure to seek directed verdict. “‘[E]ven absent a motion for a directed verdict, a criminal defendant may challenge the sufficiency of the evidence’ on appeal, as Chapman does in this appeal. Griffith v. State, 286 Ga.App. 859, 868(10)(e) (650 S.E.2d 413) (2007). See also Mack v. State, 251 Ga.App. 407, 410(4) (554 S.E.2d 542) (2001). Therefore, he cannot show prejudice by counsel's failure to make such a motion .” Nelson v. State, 283 Ga. 119, 657 S.E.2d 201 (February 11, 2008). “The failure to seek a directed verdict of acquittal on the felony murder charge does not constitute deficient performance where the evidence presented by the State was sufficient to authorize the conviction. Coggins v. State, 275 Ga. 479(3) (569 S.E.2d 505) (2002). Inasmuch as there was sufficient evidence to authorize the conviction, … trial counsel’s failure to seek a directed verdict of acquittal was not deficient performance.” 40. DISCOVERY Palmer v. State, 330 Ga.App. 679, 769 S.E.2d 107 (February 12, 2015). Family violence battery and child cruelty convictions affirmed. No prejudice in failure to provide evidence to State in discovery, resulting in its exclusion. The evidence – a photo showing alleged injuries sustained by defendant in the altercation with his wife – “was cumulative of the testimony of both Palmer and his wife. … See Schofield v. Holsey, 281 Ga. 809, 814(II) (642 S.E.2d 56) (2007) (holding that the defendant was not prejudiced by the omission of ‘largely cumulative’ evidence).” Shank v. State, 290 Ga. 844, 725 S.E.2d 246 (March 19, 2012). Murder and related convictions affirmed; no ineffective assistance in failure to provide defendant with “copies of all available discovery materials.” “[T]here is no per se rule requiring counsel for criminal defendants to provide them with copies of all discovery materials, and Appellant has not explained why, in his case, a decision not to provide him with certain materials fell outside the bounds of reasonable professional conduct. See Henry v. State, 279 Ga. 615, 616 (619 S.E.2d 609) (2005). And even if counsel were deficient in this regard, Appellant has failed to explain how this deficiency undermines confidence in the outcome of his trial. See id.” Anuforo v. State, 293 Ga.App. 1, 666 S.E.2d 50 (June 26, 2008). Family violence battery conviction affirmed. Counsel’s failure to opt in to discovery did not amount to ineffective assistance, absent “evidence that counsel was unprepared or unaware of the salient evidence before trial began. In contrast, counsel testified that he was prepared for trial, and Anuforo has pointed to nothing in the trial transcript indicating that counsel was surprised by [officer’s] testimony. … Absent contrary testimony, decisions regarding whether to opt into reciprocal discovery are presumed strategic. McClarity v. State, 234 Ga.App. 348, 352(3)(b) (506 S.E.2d 392) (1998).” Accord, Simmons v. State , 291 Ga. 705, 733 S.E.2d 280 (October 15, 2012) (“counsel consulted with experienced trial attorneys and ultimately determined that reciprocal discovery would not offer any benefit to Simmons, and he did not want to create any additional obligations. Therefore, his decision not to opt-in to reciprocal discovery was a reasonable trial strategy.”). Nichols v. State, 288 Ga.App. 118, 653 S.E.2d 300 (September 17, 2007). Aggravated child molestation and related convictions affirmed. No ineffective assistance where counsel failed to receive requested discovery. “Nichols alleges that counsel’s failure to obtain the documents was due either to a lack of proper investigation or failure to pursue the discovery to which the defense was entitled. But trial counsel filed a motion seeking disclosure of all exculpatory and impeaching information and cannot be faulted for the state’s failure to disclose it.” Beck v. State, 285 Ga.App. 764, 647 S.E.2d 408 (June 8, 2007). Methamphetamine trafficking conviction affirmed. Counsel’s decision “not to participate in reciprocal discovery , because he intended to call a character witness and ‘didn’t necessarily want the State to know about [that] beforehand’ … was a deliberate choice made as a part of trial strategy. Such reasonable tactics do not amount to deficient performance. [Cit.]” Green v. State, 281 Ga. 322, 638 S.E.2d 288 (November 28, 2006). Malice murder conviction affirmed. Counsel’s failure to comply with discovery resulted in inability to impeach witness with certified copies of his convictions, which amounted to ineffective assistance, see Gibbs (October 13, 2004), below , but no prejudice, distinguishing Gibbs : “notwithstanding trial counsel’s discovery failure, the jury was informed of the witness’s criminal history during both direct examination by the State and cross-examination by the defense and was instructed on the law of impeachment.”