Brannon v. State, S96A0301

• Decision Date: 13 May 1996
• Docket Number: No. S96A0301,S96A0301
• Citation: 266 Ga. 667,469 S.E.2d 676
• Parties: BRANNON v. The STATE.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

Page 676

469 S.E.2d 676

266 Ga. 667

BRANNON v. The STATE.

No. S96A0301.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

May 13, 1996.

Carla J. Friend, Atlanta, for Brannon.

Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., John M. Turner, Asst. Dist. Atty., Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., Department of Law, Carl P. Greenberg, Asst. Dist. Atty., Atlanta, for the State.

Allison Beth Goldberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., Department of Law, Atlanta, for other interested parties.

BENHAM, Chief Justice.

Sheila Brannon appeals from her conviction for malice murder and possession of a firearm during commission of a felony. ¹ Her only enumeration of error is that the trial court erred in denying her motion for a new trial on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence.

The evidence at trial showed that Brannon shared a dwelling with the victim, Harris. No one was present for the shooting except Brannon and Harris. Her version of the events was told in a statement she made to the police on the day she surrendered and told them of the killing, and in her testimony at trial. According to Brannon, the shooting took place during playful roughhousing. She claimed that they had often played before, sometimes with the pistol which she kept cocked under her pillow. On the occasion of the shooting, she said, Harris was holding her wrists in both hands while she held the pistol; she heard a "pop" and saw Harris fall to the floor; thinking he was playing, she walked to him, whereupon she saw blood running from a wound in his head. Brannon left the body on her bedroom floor for two days, then put it and parts of the carpet into a trash can. She tied the can closed with an electrical cord and put the can behind the adjacent dwelling and left it there until she told the police what happened and showed them where Harris's body was. Trial testimony indicated that Brannon lied to persons who made inquiry about Harris in the days following his death, claiming he had gone to work and then that he was missing. Brannon denied any intent to harm Harris, insisting that the shooting was a mere accident that occurred during their play.

The jury is the judge of the credibility of witnesses. Roker v. State, 262 Ga. 220(1), 416 S.E.2d 281 (1992). The jury here was entitled to believe that Brannon shot Harris, but was not required to believe her version of the events or to credit her denial of intent. " ' "[C]riminal intent may be found by the jury 'upon consideration of the words, conduct, demeanor, motive, and all other circumstances connected with the act for which the accused is prosecuted.' OCGA § 16-2-6." [Cit.]' " Griggs v. State, 208 Ga.App. 768(1), 432 S.E.2d 591 (1993). The evidence adduced at trial, that Brannon shot Harris to...