Macon DA’s office disqualified from case for violating ‘fundamental’ right, judge rules
The Macon Judicial Circuit District Attorney’s Office has been barred from prosecuting a rape case after a local judge ruled Thursday that a prosecutor violated the defendant’s constitutional rights.
Bibb County Superior Court Judge Jeffery Monroe disqualified the Macon Judicial Circuit District Attorney’s Office from prosecuting the case against Harold Housley, according to court records from Thursday.
Monroe ruled that investigator Trinicholas Carswell spoke to the defendant, while Assistant District Attorney Breanna Foster and investigator Nicholas McCane were in the room, without his attorney present. Monroe said this violated Housley’s 5th and 6th Amendment rights, which granted him the right to remain silent to avoid being self-incrimination, and the right to be represented by legal counsel.
The prosecutors’ actions also violated the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, which “prohibit communication regarding the subject of representation with a person known to be represented by an attorney,” Monroe wrote in his order.
At the time of the conversation, Housley was represented by attorney Allyson Yates, court records show. But Yates wasn’t present. Assistant District Attorney Kayla Calloway was prosecuting Housley’s case before the district attorney’s office was disqualified, but Calloway was not accused of wrongdoing in this incident.
Monroe ordered the district attorney’s office to appoint another district attorney’s office in the case, court records say.
Housley is accused of rape and child molestation, according to court records. He was charged April 9.
Judge: DA needs to better-train staff
Foster, McCane and Carswell discussed evidence in the case on May 16, and Carswell told the others that DNA evidence showed Housley had “fathered a child” with his victim, according to court records.
Carswell intended to go to the Bibb County Jail to tell Housley about the information, and Foster and McCane went with them, according to court records.
Carswell brought Housley into a courtroom inside the jail and told the defendant the results of the DNA test, court records say. Foster and McCane were present during the conversation. Housley denied he had sexually contacted the victim and requested an additional DNA test, according to court records. Carswell then gave a copy of the DNA result to Housley.
During the conversation, Housley was not advised of his constitutional rights, court records say. Neither Yates nor Calloway was present. As a result, Monroe ruled that the three had violated Housley’s rights during the meeting.
“This right is so fundamental and so interwoven into the fabric of our system of justice that this Court is left astonished that the subject agents of the state did what they did without investigating whether Mr. Housley had a lawyer,” Monroe said in his ruling.
In his ruling, Monroe wrote that District Attorney Anita Howard, though she didn’t engage in “personal impropriety,” was also responsible for showing an indifference to the defendant’s rights, which was evidenced by the “improper training of her lieutenants.”
The lack of training is shown by Carswell admitting that he would not have given Housley the document if he had known that Housley had an attorney, Monroe wrote. But neither Carswell, Foster, nor McCane inquired as to whether Housley had a lawyer — even though it was known to the district attorney’s office that Housley had representation.
They also chose not to use electronic databases, which Monroe argued were readily available and accessible through their phones, that would have shown them Housley had an attorney.
McCane also was accused in another case of questioning a defendant outside of the presence of their lawyer, according to court records.
“The proper training of the prosecution’s staff and the creation of a workplace where the actions described above are not excused falls squarely on the shoulders of District Attorney Howard,” Monroe said in his ruling. “Giving credence to the claims of ignorance as to whether a defendant is represented by counsel when the power to ascertain is literally at the state’s fingertips invites mischief to the hurt of our entire justice system.”
“To rule otherwise, in an attempt to localize the corrosive effect of not giving heed to such basic principles of law, would hazard incentivizing this misbehavior and allow it to metastasize,” Monroe said.
DA will appeal decision
Howard said in a statement that she believes Housley’s case should still be prosecuted by the district attorney’s office and will be filing an appeal. If the appeal is unsuccessful, Howard will “immediately refer this matter to another prosecutor’s office to ensure full accountability.”
This situation also reinforced the importance of training the staff at the district attorney’s office to maintain the highest professional standards and to serve the community effectively, Howard said.
“As a career prosecutor, I remain committed to upholding justice with the highest ethical standards and ensuring victims receive vigorous prosecution,” Howard said in her statement. “I also take seriously my responsibility to protect the rights of the accused.”
As part of the appeal process, Howard’s office requested an immediate review of the decision. Monroe wrote in a court record that an immediate review would help him “in determining whether the Macon Judicial Circuit District Attorney’s Office has been improperly disqualified from the prosecution of this case,” according to court records.
This story was originally published September 19, 2025 at 1:22 PM.
