Mcwilliams v. State

Decision Date09 October 2018
Docket NumberS18A0728
Citation820 S.E.2d 33,304 Ga. 502
Parties MCWILLIAMS v. The STATE.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Thomas Michael Martin, THE MARTIN LAW FIRM, LLC, 195 N. Jeff Davis Drive, Fayetteville, Georgia 30214, for Appellant.

Patricia B. Attaway Burton, Deputy Attorney General, Paula Khristian Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Christopher M. Carr, Attorney General, Vanessa Therese Meyerhoefer, Assistant Attorney General, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, 40 Capitol Square, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30334, Paul L. Howard, Jr., District Attorney, Kevin Christopher Armstrong, Lyndsey Hurst Rudder, Deputy D.A., FULTON COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, 136 Pryor Street, S.W., 4th Floor, Atlanta, Georgia 30303,

BENHAM, Justice.

Appellant Richard McWilliams seeks review of his convictions related to the beating death of his girlfriend Kathleen Baxter.1 For the reasons set forth below, we affirm appellant’s convictions.

1. The evidence construed in a light most favorable to upholding the jury’s verdicts shows as follows. Appellant and the victim dated for approximately five years leading up to her death. The victim confided in her daughter, as well as in a close friend, about abuse she suffered at the hands of appellant when he was drunk. At trial, both the daughter and the friend testified that Ms. Baxter told them that appellant would become verbally, physically, and sexually abusive towards her when he consumed alcohol. They testified that Ms. Baxter confided that when appellant drank, he would sometimes roughly force his fingers up Ms. Baxter’s anus despite her begging him not to do so. Ms. Baxter kept journals and photographs documenting some of the abuse she suffered at the hands of appellant. On New Year’s Day 2012, for example, appellant, who was drunk, punched Ms. Baxter in the face, breaking her nose, and also choked her. Ms. Baxter took photographs of her injuries and documented the event by posting on Facebook that same day. The photographs and a screenshot of the Facebook post were presented to the jury. In addition, Ms. Baxter had written a letter to appellant breaking up with him, complaining about, among other things, his drinking and his placing his finger "up [her] butt." Ms. Baxter had sent a blind copy of this letter to her close friend, who testified as to its authenticity, and the letter was published to the jury. A domestic violence expert testified that Ms. Baxter and appellant were in a cycle of abuse which included a pattern of verbal abuse, physical abuse, separation and reconciliation.

In October 2012, Ms. Baxter and appellant had just reconciled and decided to go on a trip to downtown Atlanta. On October 13, 2012, the two checked into the Westin Peachtree Plaza Hotel where they were the only hotel guests on the 64th floor. After checking in, the two went to two nearby restaurants where they ate and consumed alcohol. The victim took several photos of her activities, posting them to social media so that her daughter and friend knew where she was. The last photo and posting she made was at 8:15 p.m. inside the hotel room.

The next day, a hotel housekeeping supervisor testified she called hotel security upon seeing a trail of blood and vomit leading from the guest elevators to the couple’s room. Isaac Byrd, a hotel security officer, testified that when he arrived at the room, appellant told him Ms. Baxter had hit her face against the elevator door. Byrd stated that when appellant did not ask for help or assistance for Ms. Baxter, Byrd asked to see her. When Byrd and a few other hotel personnel entered the room, they noticed packed bags and a woman’s purse on the dresser. Byrd testified that the bed was covered in blood and vomit. Byrd and other hotel personnel testified that Ms. Baxter was sitting motionless on the floor, propped up against the bed. She had vomit in her hair and blood and vomit on her face, but her clothes were clean.2 Ms. Baxter made some mumbling noises, but was unresponsive to any questions. Byrd testified he made the decision to have the hotel dispatcher call 911.3 An ambulance took Ms. Baxter to Atlanta Medical Center. The hotel had the room cleaned before police became involved in the case on October 15, meaning there was no crime scene for the police to investigate. There was also no hotel video footage of the incident or witnesses to the incident other than appellant.

Several medical personnel testified about Ms. Baxter’s condition while she was a patient in the intensive care unit from October 14-21, 2012. Nursing personnel testified the victim had bruising to her anus and a tear in her rectum. The nursing staff took photographs of these injuries and turned them over to police. In addition to suffering from trauma to her head and the injuries to her anus and rectum, a nurse testified Ms. Baxter had the imprint of a hand on her arm and a bruise on the left side of her neck. The neurosurgeon who treated Ms. Baxter testified that Ms. Baxter had lacerations and abrasions to her face and body; a "ligamental" strain "in" her neck; bleeding on both sides of her brain in the frontal lobe area; and trauma to the deep center of her brain which caused lesions. The neurosurgeon testified the injuries to Ms. Baxter’s head caused increased "intracranial" pressure resulting in more damage to her brain, despite efforts to control the pressure. Eventually, Ms. Baxter’s family members decided to withdraw her from life support and she died on October 21.

Appellant did not testify at trial; however, he gave varying pretrial statements to different people as to how Ms. Baxter was injured, including two recorded statements to police that were played for the jury. For example, appellant told a hotel security officer that Ms. Baxter’s injuries were from her face hitting the elevator door; but he also told the hotel’s assistant director of housekeeping that the victim fell and hit her head on the trash receptacle near the elevator. A nurse testified that appellant said the victim was injured when elevator doors closed on her head. Appellant told police that he and Ms. Baxter were in their room when she decided to go back out. Because he did not want her to leave, he said he followed her down the hall and grabbed her by the arm. Appellant told police he and the victim were standing about four feet away from the guest elevators "fussing" when one of the elevators dinged. Appellant stated Ms. Baxter pulled away from him and ran into the nearest elevator door which was not the one that had opened. Having hit her head, appellant said Ms. Baxter started vomiting and he took her back to the room for the night.

The medical examiner performed the autopsy on Ms. Baxter on October 22, 2012. She testified that the cause of death was blunt force trauma to the head and the posterior of the neck and that the manner of death was homicide. The medical examiner testified that the trauma to the head was made by a "severe" force, causing bleeding on Ms. Baxter’s brain. Both the medical examiner and the treating neurosurgeon testified that the head injuries Ms. Baxter sustained were inconsistent with her running into an elevator from a distance of four feet. The neurosurgeon testified that Ms. Baxter’s injuries were more akin to injuries caused by being in a car accident.

The State introduced extrinsic acts evidence pursuant to Rule 404 (b)4 and Rule 4135 concerning appellant’s relationships with two other women—one whom he dated before he dated the victim and one whom he dated after the victim’s death and through his trial. Both of the women testified that appellant was verbally and physically abusive to them when he drank. Both women recounted instances where appellant inflicted blows to their heads.6 The women also testified that appellant was violent when they tried to leave his vicinity because of his drunkenness and abusive behavior. In addition, one of the women testified that appellant had touched her anus against her will.

2. Appellant contends the evidence was insufficient to convict him of false imprisonment, aggravated sexual battery and aggravated assault. We address each count in turn.

a. Although the jury returned a verdict of guilty on the count of false imprisonment, appellant was not convicted or sentenced for that crime.7 Therefore, his allegations as to that charge are moot. See Byron v. State, 303 Ga. 218, 219 at n. 3 (1) (a), 811 S.E.2d 296 (2018).

b. A person commits an aggravated sexual battery "when he or she intentionally penetrates with a foreign object the sexual organ or anus of another person without the consent of that person." OCGA § 16-6-22.2 (b). "[T]he term ‘foreign object’ means any article or instrument other than the sexual organ of a person." OCGA § 16-6-22.2 (a). At trial, the State presented direct and circumstantial evidence of an aggravated sexual battery. The prosecutor presented testimony from the nurses attending to Ms. Baxter while she was still alive in the hospital that Ms. Baxter had bruising of her anus as well as a tear in her rectum. In addition to this testimony, the State presented photographs of the injury taken by the nursing staff while Ms. Baxter was still alive and being treated at the hospital. While the medical examiner testified that she did not note any such injury at the time of the autopsy, she confirmed that the injury could have healed by the time the autopsy took place over a week after Ms. Baxter was admitted to the hospital. The State also presented testimony from Ms. Baxter’s close friend who stated that Ms. Baxter confided to her that when appellant drank heavily, he would sometimes place his finger in Ms. Baxter’s anus even though she told him no and told him she did not like it. The State also introduced excerpts from a letter from Ms. Baxter to appellant in which she indicated she did not like his drinking and his placing his finger "up [her] butt." Additionally, appellant admitted to police that he had been drinking and that he and Ms. Baxter had been...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Wilson v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 21 Junio 2021
    ...charged offenses. We review this claim, which was raised in the trial court, for an abuse of discretion. See McWilliams v. State , 304 Ga. 502, 511 (3) n.15, 820 S.E.2d 33 (2018) (trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting extrinsic-acts evidence pursuant to Rule 413 ); Dixon v. ......
  • Morrell v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 15 Febrero 2022
    ...to consider the other acts for any other purpose, and that Morrell was not on trial for those other acts. See McWilliams v. State , 304 Ga. 502, 511 (3), 820 S.E.2d 33 (2018) ("Any prejudicial impact of the extrinsic acts evidence was mitigated when the trial court gave the jury specific in......
  • Chambers v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 9 Septiembre 2019
    ...omitted) (quoting United States v. Ellisor , 522 F.3d 1255, 1267 (II) (A) (11th Cir. 2008) ); accord McWilliams v. State , 304 Ga. 502, 509 (3), 820 S.E.2d 33 (2018) ; see State v. Jones , 297 Ga. 156, 158-59 (1), 773 S.E.2d 170 (2015) (holding that under Rule 404 (b) the State must make a ......
  • McKinney v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 21 Octubre 2019
    ...it only to the extent that it was relevant to show his identity, intent, and motive in the charged crimes. See McWilliams v. State , 304 Ga. 502, 511, 820 S.E.2d 33 (2018) ("Any prejudicial impact of the extrinsic acts evidence was mitigated when the trial court gave the jury specific instr......
  • 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