Matabarahona v. the State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Ray, Judge.
After a jury trial, Manuel Matabarahona was convicted of one count of child molestation (OCGA § 16-6-4 (a) (1)). Matabarahona appeals from his conviction and the denial of his amended motion for new trial, contending that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s verdict and that he was denied the right to confront the child-victim at trial. He also contends that he had ineffective assistance of counsel. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
1. Matabarahona argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for child molestation. We disagree.
On appeal…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Hill v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2012
- Hartsfield v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2014
- Whitaker v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2008
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Clark v. the StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2016
- Michael Abernathy v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2020