☢ test - Í

2014) (appellate counsel not ineffective for failing to present alibi testimony of defendant and his grandmother at hearing on motion for new trial, a theory never disclosed to counsel by defendant). Heath v. State, 268 Ga.App. 235, 601 S.E.2d 758 (July 1, 2004). Conviction for serious injury by vehicle reversed. Defendant showed prejudice where counsel made no investigation of the case and defendant had no recollection of the event but identified to counsel possible witnesses. “It is reasonable to expect a defendant’s attorney to conduct an investigation to determine the facts upon which all future decisions would be made. This is especially true where the defendant, because of trauma, has no memory of the event. Under such a circumstance, a lawyer is duty-bound to investigate so that he can properly advise his client.” Inconsistent with most case law, which would require a showing that the investigation would have likely resulted in a different outcome, not merely a possibility. White v. State, 265 Ga.App. 155, 592 S.E.2d 920 (January 13, 2004). Kidnapping and related convictions affirmed. Fact that counsel failed to investigate victim’s background to find out about her felony conviction was insufficient to reverse conviction for ineffective assistance of counsel; defendant failed to “show a reasonable probability that the results would have been different” given this information, in light of “the wealth of evidence against him” and counsel’s effective cross- examination and impeachment of the victim. Lovelace v. State, 241 Ga.App. 774, 527 S.E.2d 878 (January 11, 2000). Conviction for aggravated assault affirmed; no ineffective assistance for failure to interview State’s witnesses absent “evidence that the failure to interview the State's witnesses prejudiced his defense.” Accord, Keaton v. State , 311 Ga.App. 14, 714 S.E.2d 693 (July 14, 2011) (“Keaton utterly failed to demonstrate how any alleged lack of preparation created a reasonable probability that the outcome of his trial would have been different.”); Shank v. State , 290 Ga. 844, 725 S.E.2d 246 (March 19, 2012); Norton v. State , 293 Ga. 332, 745 S.E.2d 630 (July 1, 2013). 111. WITNESSES/ SECURE WITNESSES/PRESENT EVIDENCE/SECURE EVIDENCE/FAILURE TO PRESENT, See also subheadings DAMAGING EVIDENCE, PRESENTING, and SENTENCING , above New case! Clark v. State, S15A0230, ___ Ga. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___, 2016 WL 3145123 (June 6, 2016). Felony murder and firearms convictions affirmed. Under pre-2013 Evidence code, no ineffective assistance in failing to present evidence of victim’s prior violent acts toward third parties. “[T]rial counsel focused on prior instances in which McNeil had bullied Clark, himself, rather than unrelated instances involving third parties. This strategy was not unreasonable.” King v. State, A16A0685, ___ Ga.App. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___, 2016 WL 1726147 (May 2, 2016). Statutory rape and related convictions affirmed. No ineffective assistance in failure to obtain security camera recordings from hotel/scene of the crime. Defendant contends that the footage would have shown him arriving at the hotel alone, but that trial counsel waited for several months to request it, by which time the footage was recorded over. However, defendant fails to show that the footage ever existed, or existed at the time of counsel’s appointment (some three months after the incident). “We recognize that ‘counsel must prioritize his or her investigation and preparation for trial,’ Chapel v. State, 270 Ga. 151, 159 (510 S.E.2d 802) (1998); therefore, we cannot conclude that waiting several months before seeking video surveillance evidence directly from the hotel was deficient performance. See id. (‘[W]e cannot conclude that delaying some interviews [of alibi witnesses until two years after the murder] falls outside the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.’). Moreover, King has not shown prejudice. There was no evidence that the hotel had any video surveillance, much less whether the surveillance covered all entrances to the hotel. Thus, assuming trial counsel had been successful in obtaining video surveillance footage showing King arriving at the hotel alone, this would not necessarily contradict M.P.’s testimony.” Dority v. State, 335 Ga.App. 83, 780 S.E.2d 129 (November 20, 2015). Aggravated child molestation and related convictions affirmed. Under 2013 Evidence Code, 1. No ineffective assistance in failing to introduce psychologist’s report on her investigation, which contained both useful and damaging information. Counsel instead used the report to successfully impeach a State’s witness, without admitting the report itself which otherwise was consistent with victim’s allegations against Dority. “After reviewing the report, the court understood why trial counsel ‘had reservations’ about using it at trial. We agree and find no possible harm even if trial counsel erred by assuming that he was not authorized to use the report.” 2. Similarly, no ineffective assistance in failing to introduce recording of victim’s outcry, which was both useful and damaging. Useful: the recording showed the family’s “suggestive questioning techniques that might have influenced the child’s report.” But “the audio was prejudicial because it revealed that the child was emotional and