☢ test - Í

[investigator and] expert[s] ... [Arbegast] has not shown that he was prejudiced by any trial counsel error in this regard.’ Battise v. State, 309 Ga.App. 835, 837(2)(b), 711 S.E.2d 390 (2011) (citation and punctuation omitted).” Moore v. State, 293 Ga. 676, 748 S.E.2d 419 (September 9, 2013). Malice murder conviction affirmed; no ineffective assistance from failure to retain fingerprint expert. 1. Counsel consulted with a former FBI fingerprint examiner who “confirmed the State's finding that the thumb print found on the fence at the crime scene was Moore's thumb print. Trial counsel chose not to have this opinion reduced to writing because he did not want to disclose it during discovery. Because trial counsel made a reasonable strategic decision not to pursue additional investigation of the fingerprint evidence after consulting with the FBI examiner, this claim for ineffective assistance of counsel fails.” 2. Trial court properly denied defendant’s “post-conviction motions to compel the State's expert to perform a latent print tape lift from a galvanized pipe and to hire an expert to prove Exhibits 109–A to 109–D were photographs rather than latent print cards. The grant or denial of a post-trial request for expert witnesses lies within the sound discretion of the trial court, and the defendant must demonstrate a special need for the witness. Totten v. State, 276 Ga. 199(2) (577 S.E.2d 272) (2003).” All evidence at motion for new trial hearing contradicted defendant’s claims in this regard. “Based on the record and Moore's failure to show a special need for the experts, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Moore's post-trial motions for expert assistance. See Robinson v. State, 277 Ga. 75(3) (586 S.E.2d 313) (2003) (no abuse of discretion in denying a post-conviction motion to retain a forensic pathologist to show trial counsel ineffective for failing to retain an expert); Totten v. State, 276 Ga. at 200–201 (no abuse of discretion in denying a post-conviction request for funds to hire an investigator when trial court authorized funds to hire an investigator prior to trial).” Darst v. State, 323 Ga.App. 614, 746 S.E.2d 865 (July 16, 2013). Physical precedent only. Convictions for aggravated child molestation reversed, based on ineffective assistance of counsel. Defendant showed that counsel was deficient in multiple ways, and that there is a reasonable probability that the outcome of the trial would have been different but for counsel’s deficient performance. 1. Counsel was deficient in failing “to obtain the children's school, therapy, and [DFCS] records.” At new trial hearing, defense presented the records and showed that they would have bolstered the defense argument and cast doubt on the State’s case. “During the hearing on the motion for new trial, trial counsel admitted that he had not obtained a subpoena for any of the records prior to trial, and he offered no strategic reason for failing to do so. Instead, he stated that it was his ‘understanding’ that the Department's records for the children had been lost.[fn] Although he later testified that he ‘was told [the records] were lost,’ he never identified any person he had contacted or other measures he had taken prior to trial to verify whether the records were, in fact, available. Moreover, trial counsel admitted that he did not know what information was in the Department's records, stating that ‘[m]aybe it would have been something helpful [to Darst], maybe not.’ Instead of trying to obtain the records, he decided that he would just ‘let it go’ and try to use the absence of the records to Darst's advantage at trial by arguing to the jurors that the records were just another piece of evidence the State had failed to present that would have helped them better understand the children's background. Further, although trial counsel testified that he made some efforts to contact the children's therapist before trial, he offered no explanation for why he did not attempt to subpoena the children's therapy or school records.” 2. Counsel was deficient in failing “to consult with and utilize an expert witness who would have been able to show the jury that the children's behavior was inconsistent with having been molested by him.” Expert presented at motion hearing testified to such an opinion. Trial counsel testified that he never considered getting such an expert, and never discussed it with defendant, although he was aware that such evidence was admissible. “[T]rial counsel readily admitted that he had not made a conscious strategic decision about whether to do so.” 3. Counsel was deficient in failing “to consult with and utilize an expert witness on the subject of conducting reliable forensic interviews.” Expert presented at motion hearing demonstrated deficiencies in interviews with children here; again, trial counsel testified it never occurred to him to present such evidence and he never discussed it with defendant, although he was aware it existed. Counsel agreed his performance was deficient. “Significantly, Darst's trial counsel failed to address any of these issues in his cursory cross-examination of the forensic examiner. … [T]rial counsel admitted that he did not make a conscious strategic decision about whether to consult with or hire an expert to offer an opinion on the reliability of the interviews,” although he watched the recordings of the interviews. 4. Counsel was deficient in failing to object to harmful “ inadmissible hearsay testimony that the children's biological father and uncle had successfully completed psycho-sexual evaluations, as well as hearsay testimony that there had been a recommendation that he submit to a psycho-sexual evaluation, but that it was unclear whether he had done so.” 5. Cumulative effect of counsel’s deficient performance created “is a reasonable probability that the outcome of the trial would have been different.” Citing Perkins v. Hall, 288 Ga. 810, 812–818(II) (708 S.E.2d 335) (2011) (the collective effect of trial counsel's errors resulted in the reversal of the defendant's death sentence).”