Jones v. State
Annotate this CaseDefendant challenged his convictions for malice murder and other offenses stemming from the shooting death of the victim. The court held that the record supported the trial court's ruling that the State did not act in bad faith with regard to disclosure of the witness statement at issue and defendant did not argue that it did, so the more severe remedies that defendant sought were not applicable under OCGA 17-16-6. Because the court concluded that defendant failed to show prejudice, the court need not decide whether the record demanded the conclusion that his defense counsel provided deficient performance by advising defendant that he could not testify at trial. Even assuming that defense counsel should have objected to the investigator's comment at issue, no prejudice resulted. Finally, the trial court did not err in permitting a detective, over objection, to give improper double hearsay testimony. Although the detective's testimony could have been better focused to address the relevant issue without mentioning out-of-court statements, there was no reversible error. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.