MCFADDEN, C. J., MCMILLIAN, P. J., and SENIOR APPELLATE JUDGE
McFadden, Chief Judge.
jury trial, Jamario Vickers was convicted of aggravated child
molestation. He appeals the denial of his motion for new
trial, arguing that his trial counsel was ineffective.
Because Vickers has not shown both deficient performance and
prejudice, he has not demonstrated ineffective assistance of
trial counsel. So we affirm.
Sufficiency of the evidence.
in the light most favorable to the verdict, see Virger v.
State, 305 Ga. 281, 286 (2) (824 S.E.2d 3346) (2019),
the evidence shows that in November 2014, the six-year-old
victim and her seven-year-old and nine-year-old
cousins were playing in the outside stairwell of
an apartment complex when sixteen-year-old Vickers joined
them. Vickers told the victim to walk upstairs with him and
gave the cousins a cell phone to use to play games. He told
the cousins not to go upstairs.
walked upstairs with the victim to the landing at the top of
the stairs. He pulled down the victim's pants and put his
penis in her buttocks. The seven-year-old cousin went
upstairs and saw Vickers moving on top of the victim with his
penis "in her butt." Vickers pulled up his pants
and told the cousin to go back downstairs. That cousin told
the nine-year-old cousin, who then went upstairs and saw
Vickers laying on top of the victim.
the victim came down the stairs, she whispered to her
seven-year-old cousin that Vickers "had put his private
part in [her] booty."
days later, the victim disclosed what happened to two adults
who were close family friends. A couple of weeks later, the
victim, the cousins, the victim's mother, and the two
adult family friends happened to see Vickers while they all
were waiting at a bus stop. The victim appeared to be
terrified; the cousins explained to the adults that Vickers
was standing nearby.
victim and her cousins were interviewed by forensic
interviewers who were qualified at trial as experts in the
field of forensic interviewing. Recordings of those
interviews were played for the jury and were consistent with
the victim's and her cousins' trial testimony. In her
interview, the victim described the abuse, telling the
interviewer that Vickers took her upstairs, laid her on the
ground, pulled her pants down, pulled his private part out,
and put it in her "butt." She said it felt nasty
and it hurt.
state presented the testimony of an expert in forensic
psychotherapy and the psychology of child sexual abuse who
viewed the videotaped interviews. She testified that the
victim's and her cousins' statements in the
interviews were consistent with the cognitive ability and
development of children their ages; the language they used
was appropriate to their developmental levels; they provided
contextual details; and there were no signs that the children
had been influenced by suggestion.
[Vickers] does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence,
we have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
the trial evidence was legally sufficient to authorize a
rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt that
he was guilty of the crime for which he was convicted."
Jones v. State, 305 Ga. 653, 654 (1) (827 S.E.2d
254) (2019). See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307,
319 (III) (B) (99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560) (1979).
Ineffective assistance of counsel.
claims that his trial counsel was ineffective in opening the
door to the admission of evidence of his bad character. To
prevail on this claim, Vickers "must show both that his
counsel performed deficiently and that, but for the
deficiency, there is a reasonable probability that the
outcome of his trial would have been more favorable. . . . If
[Vickers] fails to satisfy either the deficient performance
or the prejudice prong of [this] test, [we are] not required
to examine the other." Slaton v. State, 303 Ga.
651, 652-653 (2) (814 S.E.2d 344) (2018) (citations and
punctuation omitted). "While we have often held that a
defendant fails to satisfy the [prejudice prong] where the
evidence is overwhelming, strong evidence of guilt can also
support the conclusion that no reasonable probability of a
different outcome exists."Parker v. State, 339
Ga.App. 285, 294 (3) (793 S.E.2d 173) (2016) .
counsel called three defense witnesses: Vickers, his brother,
and his sister. Trial counsel asked the brother whether
Vickers has a good or bad reputation in their community, and
he answered good. When trial counsel asked the sister about
her understanding of Vickers' reputation in the
community, the sister answered that he looks like a
"tough guy" on the outside but "he's
really soft on the inside." Trial counsel ...