This is the second appearance of this case in the Court of Appeals. Myron Wendell Sheppard was convicted on two counts of child molestation and sentenced to twenty years with ten to serve. His motion for new trial was denied and he appealed. This Court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that Sheppard had waived his assertions that the Georgia Child Hearsay Statute is unconstitutional in light of Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 124 SC 1354, 158 LEd2d 177 2004, and that the same statute was unconstitutionally applied in his case. Sheppard v. State , 294 Ga. App. 270, 271-272 1, 2 669 SE2d 152 2008. Sheppard also asserted that “the trial court erred when it admitted similar transaction evidence without holding a Uniform Superior Court Rule 31.3 B hearing pursuant to Williams v. State, 261 Ga. 640, 642 2 b 409 SE2d 649 1991.” Id. at 270. On that point, this Court vacated the trial court’s judgment of conviction and remanded the case “with direction that it determine whether a Rule 31.3 B hearing has already been held and, if not, to hold such a hearing.” Id. at 273. On remand, the trial court determined that a proper hearing as required by Rule 31.3 B had been held on June 14, 2004, and a transcript of that hearing has been provided to this court. The trial court concluded that “the proffer made by the State’s Attorney established the requirements for the admission of the similar transactions pursuant to Williams v. State . . . .” Accordingly, the court reinstated the judgment.
1. Sheppard contends the trial court erred because, at the hearing, the prosecutor only made a proffer of the similar transaction evidence rather than introducing the actual evidence of those events. Therefore, Sheppard contends, the State did not carry its burden of proof and, furthermore, he was deprived of an opportunity to confront and cross examine the similar transaction witnesses. He argues that because he had no prior convictions associated with any of the alleged similar transactions and that the State did not have certified copies of prior convictions or pleas, the State was required to produce actual evidence of the prior occurrences at the Rule 31.3 B hearing.
