## Facts

- Michael Smith lived in the same household as the child victim, her mother, and her brother.
- Smith was prosecuted for rape, statutory rape, child molestation, and cruelty to children, based largely on the victim’s testimony and testimony from an expert and other state witnesses.
- Outside the jury’s presence, Smith proffered testimony from about ten witnesses that the victim had previously made similar accusations of sexual misconduct against other men and that those accusations were false or later recanted.
- The trial court excluded all proffered “prior false accusation” evidence under Georgia’s rape-shield statute, OCGA § 24-2-3, relying on an intermediate appellate decision.
- The trial court allowed general impeachment evidence that the victim had a poor reputation for truthfulness.
- Smith was convicted on all charges and appealed, arguing the exclusion misapplied the rape-shield statute and impaired confrontation.

## Issues

1. Whether OCGA § 24-2-3 bars evidence that the complaining witness previously made false accusations of sexual misconduct against others.
2. What foundational showing, if any, is required before a defendant may introduce evidence of prior false accusations.
3. Whether excluding such evidence implicates the defendant’s right to confront and impeach the complaining witness.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed Smith’s convictions and remanded.
- The court held that evidence of prior false accusations is not evidence of “past sexual behavior” within OCGA § 24-2-3 and is not excluded by the rape-shield statute.
- The court held such evidence may be admitted to impeach the complainant’s credibility and as substantive evidence that the charged offense did not occur, if the trial court first finds a reasonable probability the prior accusations were false.
- The trial court erred by categorically excluding the proffered testimony under the rape-shield statute without making any threshold falsity determination.

## Legal Principles

- Georgia’s rape-shield statute bars evidence of a victim’s “past sexual behavior,” but it does not bar evidence that the victim made prior false accusations of sexual misconduct.
- Evidence of prior false accusations is admissible for impeachment and may also be used substantively to support the defense claim that the charged offense did not occur.
- Before admitting such evidence, the trial court must conduct a hearing outside the jury’s presence and determine there is a reasonable probability that the prior accusations were false.
- A trial court may not exclude prior-false-accusation evidence solely by labeling it “sexual behavior” evidence; exclusion requires application of the threshold falsity screen and ordinary admissibility limits.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Court of Georgia held that the rape-shield statute does not exclude proof that a complainant previously made false sexual-misconduct accusations; after a judicial finding of a reasonable probability of falsity, the evidence may be admitted for impeachment and as substantive proof, requiring reversal where the trial court excluded it categorically.


Smith v. State, 259 Ga. 135, 377 S.E.2d 158 (Ga. 1989)