Benton v. State, 75448
| Decision Date | 20 October 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 75448,75448 |
| Citation | 184 Ga.App. 684,362 S.E.2d 421 |
| Parties | BENTON v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
John R. Calhoun, Savannah, for appellant.
Dupont K. Cheney, Dist. Atty., J. Thomas Durden, Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Jeffrey Benton was found guilty of one count of child molestation and two counts of aggravated child molestation. He appeals from the denial of his motion for new trial.
1. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in allowing the jury to disperse without cautionary or other appropriate instructions in regard to not speaking to others or among themselves about the case. Under OCGA § 15-12-142(a), the judge may allow the jury to separate and be dispersed in any noncapital criminal case "under appropriate instructions." While no pretrial jury instructions appear in the transcript of the trial record in this case, it is indicated by the judge's statement to the jury at the first recess, to "[k]eep in mind the instructions that the Court gave you about discussing the case with anyone," that such instructions were in fact given. Violation of the statute or the possibility of unauthorized contact or communication involving a juror does not automatically demand that the appellant be granted a new trial. Legare v. State, 243 Ga. 744(11), 257 S.E.2d 247 (1979); cert. den. 444 U.S. 984, 100 S.Ct. 491, 62 L.Ed.2d 413 (1979). The record discloses no objection to the trial court's instructions in this matter, and it is not alleged that any was made. Nor does appellant assert that any contact which related to the case was made among the jurors or between a juror and a third person so as to show that any harm occurred. Therefore, any error in the trial court's instructions was rendered harmless. Cf. Perault v. State, 162 Ga.App. 294(1), 291 S.E.2d 122 (1982).
2. Appellant urges error in the trial court's failure to properly exercise its discretion in ruling on the competency of one of the minor witness-victims, an eight-year-old girl. Although not all of this child's answers were completely responsive as to actual dates, her testimony was entirely consistent with that of the other two victims. Her Head v. State, 180 Ga.App. 901, 902(2), 350 S.E.2d 854 (1986).
3. Appellant asserts that he was denied his right to a fair trial because of inflammatory and prejudicial remarks made by the prosecutor during his closing argument. The particular statement complained of was that of the three brothers who participated in the events for which appellant was being tried, the other two had been "convicted of their involvement" in juvenile court proceedings. Conceding that no contemporaneous objection was made, appellant argues that this remark was nevertheless so grossly improper that he should be granted a new trial because any curative instructions would have been of no value. We do not agree.
Review of the trial transcript reveals that defense counsel in his closing argument twice made reference to the participation of appellant's two younger brothers in the crimes of which he was accused. When the prosecutor presented his closing argument he referred to defense counsel's "having told you there were three people involved in this series of events," that their cases "were handled in Juvenile Court,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Boatright v. State
...who was not a witness in the case subject to sequestration, to stand behind the children during their testimony. Benton v. State, 184 Ga.App. 684(4), 362 S.E.2d 421. It was not error to allow the children to sit at the small table in front of the jury. Ortiz v. State, 188 Ga.App. 532(2), 37......
-
Green v. State, s. 76342 and 76351
...the State. There was no objection to the argument below and, therefore, there is nothing to be reviewed on appeal. Benton v. State, 184 Ga.App. 684(3), 362 S.E.2d 421 (1987); Hamilton v. State, 181 Ga.App. 279(2), 351 S.E.2d 705 5. The failure of his trial counsel to object to the alleged i......
-
Smith v. State
...testify, the court's discretion, absent manifest abuse, will not be interfered with by this court." ...' [Cit.]" Benton v. State, 184 Ga.App. 684, 685, 362 S.E.2d 421 (1987). There is no evidence in the record which would support Smith's contention that the child victim in this case was men......
-
Williamson v. State, A98A1156.
...v. State, 204 Ga.App. 657, 658(5), 420 S.E.2d 349; Boatright v. State, 192 Ga.App. 112, 114(5), 385 S.E.2d 298; Benton v. State, 184 Ga.App. 684, 686(4), 362 S.E.2d 421. In this instance, the grandmother was also a witness in the case and the trial court resolved any sequestration issues by......