Lockwood v. State

Defendant could not show that his counsel was deficient for not requesting a psychiatric evaluation without showing a likelihood that such an evaluation would have affected the outcome of his trial.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Following the Spalding County Superior Court’s refusal to accept his plea of guilty as improvidently tendered, Wilmer C. Lockwood was convicted by jury of a single count of aggravated assault and sentenced to serve ten years in prison, followed by ten years probation. Lockwood appeals from the denial of his motion for new trial, as amended, challenging the sufficiency of evidence, the effectiveness of counsel, and the superior court’s denial of his request for a pre-sentence report as an abuse of discretion. Finding the evidence sufficient, no ineffectiveness of counsel, and no error as to the request for pre-sentence report, we affirm.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, Singleton v. State, 231 Ga. App. 694 1 500 SE2d 411 1998, the evidence shows that the victim, Walter Futral, ordered Lockwood out of his convenience store at approximately 4:30 p.m., on February 7, 1999, having earlier “barred” Lockwood from the premises for, among other things, using profanity in the presence of his Futral’s wife. Lockwood left the store after Futral told him that the police had been called but returned approximately an hour later, cursing Futral and telling him to come to the front of the store. Over the protestations of a customer, Futral did so and again ordered Lockwood out of the store, telling him to wait for police that had been called once more. Lockwood went to his truck, got a long board with protruding nails, ran back to the entrance of the store, and swung the board at Futral, causing him to step back to avoid being hit. Futral then pulled his gun from his right pants pocket and told Lockwood, “I’ll kill you.” Lockwood replied, “Go ahead and shoot me,” got in his vehicle, and sped off in the direction of his home, where police later arrested him. At trial, Lockwood testified that he had swung at Futral in self-defense. Held:

Lockwood v. State

Defendant could not show that his counsel was deficient for not requesting a psychiatric evaluation without showing a likelihood that such an evaluation would have affected the outcome of his trial.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report