Bailey v. State, 38546

Decision Date25 May 1982
Docket NumberNo. 38546,38546
Citation291 S.E.2d 704,249 Ga. 535
PartiesBAILEY v. The STATE.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

E. Marcus Davis, Kadish, Davis & Brofman, Atlanta, for Verlin William Bailey.

Robert E. Wilson, Dist. Atty., Ann Mitchell, Asst. Dist. Atty., Decatur, Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., Atlanta, George M. Weaver, Staff Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

JORDAN, Chief Justice.

Verlin W. Bailey was convicted in DeKalb County of the murder of Himelda Barios Bailey, his wife, and of the murder of Tracy Allen Huyett, a boyfriend of Cindy Rochester, Bailey's tenant. The state sought the death penalty. The jury returned two life sentences.

For several months, Cindy had rented a room and bath in the Bailey home. She and her friend, Tracy, returned to the Bailey home during the early morning hours following a night and early morning of dancing and drinking at the Limelight Disco. Bailey was awake and awaiting their return. He took her key, refunded the balance of her monthly rental payment, and demanded that she vacate her rooms that morning. While Cindy went upstairs to her room to change clothes, Tracy remained behind, or went back, downstairs to reason with Bailey.

When Cindy heard a loud noise downstairs, she ran to the top of the stairs, from where she saw Bailey repeatedly firing bullets into Tracy's body as it lay face down on the hall floor. She left the Bailey home through a window, and summoned the police.

The investigating officers discovered the bodies of the two victims lying in the hallway. Mrs. Bailey had been shot once through the chest. Tracy had been shot once in the body from the front. Fourteen other rear-entry gunshot wounds later were identified in Tracy's back, spine, neck and head. Ninety percent of his brains had been blown out of the cranial cavity by repeated shots to the back of his head, which had severed a large portion of his face.

Bailey testified that he shot Tracy with a .30 caliber M-1 carbine until the magazine was empty after Tracy called him a SOB, told him that he was not going to get away with evicting Cindy, and started moving toward him in a drunken, belligerent manner, with teeth gnashing, eyes glaring, and saying that he was going to get him. There was no evidence indicating that Tracy was armed. Tracy's blood alcohol level was .09 percent. See Code Ann. § 68A-902.1(a).

Bailey's decision to evict Cindy had resulted from his dissatisfaction with her lifestyle. He had taped her telephone conversations, and had been displeased, among other things, with her having men visitors in her room contrary to the conditions of her lease. He had considered evicting her months earlier but had relented. Bailey and his wife had met at a church-related gathering and they spent a large amount of time at church and participating in church-related functions.

Although Bailey testified that he loved his wife, the jury heard evidence indicating that they had had marital problems. Bailey, himself, gave little account of the circumstances surrounding the shooting of his wife.

1. Trial defense counsel stipulated that Bailey was sane at the time of the shooting under the "right-wrong" test of Code Ann. § 26-702, but contended by plea that Bailey shot his victims while suffering under a delusional compulsion. Code Ann. § 26-703. The refusal of the trial court to sustain the plea or to charge the law of delusional compulsion is enumerated as error by Bailey.

Bailey was fifty years of age at the time of the shootings. He had received a medical discharge from the Army in 1958 as a result of his mental condition. Before discharge, he had been promoted to the rank of master sergeant, and had served in combat in Korea. He was under treatment with tranquilizers from 1958 to the date of his trial.

Bailey had been unable to keep a job of any importance since his military discharge, and was advised by his physicians always to avoid high stress situations. He had been married five times. His last wife, one of his two victims, and he had met at a church social. He had occupied his time over the years since his military discharge by attending religious services. Income usually was provided by renting rooms in his large, Druid Hills home to boarders such as Cindy Rochester who were attending or working at or near Emory University. He had no prior criminal record other than a DUI conviction some thirteen years ago.

Bailey testified that he shot Tracy because he felt he was being threatened by Tracy; that he shot Tracy "for survival." Two psychiatrists testified that Bailey was a diagnosed chronic paranoid schizophrenic; that Bailey had perceived he was being confronted with a life-threatening situation although reality was otherwise; that Bailey had overreacted based on his perception; and that because of his mental condition Bailey had reacted more strongly and defensively, and his reactions had been more exaggerated, than those of a normal person.

We previously have held that in order for the defense of delusional compulsion to be available in a trial for murder " 'there must be evidence that the defendant was laboring under a delusion, that the act itself was connected with the delusion and furthermore that the delusion would, if true, justify the act.' " Taylor v. State, 243 Ga. 222, 227, 253 S.E.2d 191 (1979); Graham v. State, 236 Ga. 378, 379, 223 S.E.2d 803 (1976). To what we held in Taylor and Graham must be appended the necessary implication of Code Ann. § 26-703 that a chronic paranoid schizophrenic may no more voluntarily and intentionally induce his delusion than a chronic alcoholic voluntarily may induce his drunkenness then expect the homicide to be excused rather than criminal. Code Ann. § 26-704.

Contrary to his physicians' advice to avoid highly stressful...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Harper v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • June 2, 1982
  • Williams v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • December 5, 1983
    ...Phillips, supra, 247 Ga. p. 248, 275 S.E.2d 323; Wilson v. State, supra, 212 Ga. Page 81 at 77-78, 90 S.E.2d 557; Bailey v. State, 249 Ga. 535(6), 291 S.E.2d 704, 707 (1982). This conclusion accords with appellant's statement on appeal that the defense had an agreement with the trial court ......
  • Lawrence v. State, S94A1756
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • February 27, 1995
    ...v. State, 105 Ga. 746(1), 31 S.E. 764 (1898). See, e.g., Stevens v. State, 256 Ga. supra at 442, 350 S.E.2d 21; Bailey v. State, 249 Ga. 535, 537, 291 S.E.2d 704 (1982); Brown v. State, 228 Ga., supra at 217, 184 S.E.2d Appellant argues that the "justification" language in the charge uncons......
  • Weaver v. the State.
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • February 7, 2011
    ...return and thus communication through defense counsel is preferable. State v. Chapple, supra at 1033(I). See also Bailey v. State, 249 Ga. 535, 539(6), 291 S.E.2d 704 (1982). Under all of the circumstances, we find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in proceeding with trial i......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT