Bush v. State
| Decision Date | 28 April 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. S97A0280,S97A0280 |
| Parties | , 97 FCDR 1441 BUSH v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Ernie M. Sheffield, Colquitt and Billy M. Grantham, Donalsonville, for Bush.
Angelica M. Woo, Asst. Atty. Gen., Department of Law, Atlanta, John W. Warr, Asst. Dist. Atty., Bainbridge, and Paula K. Smith, Senior Asst. Atty. Gen., Department of Law, Atlanta, for State.
This appeal is from Corea Bush's conviction for felony murder. 1 The evidence at trial established the following occurrences. As the victim was walking by a group of young people, one of the young people approached and knocked him down. He attempted to flee, but was knocked down again and was encircled by a smaller group of young men who stomped and kicked him to death. Several eyewitnesses identified Bush as a member of the larger group; some witnesses identified him as a member of the smaller group which circled the victim; and some identified him as one who shouted obscenities and encouraged the stomping. A co-indictee who had negotiated a plea testified that Bush participated with the witness in kicking the victim, and that Bush laughed on the way home about kicking the victim. Bush gave a statement to the police in which he admitted kicking the victim once, but stated that he did not mean to do so.
In his sole enumeration of error, Bush complains that the evidence adduced at trial was not sufficient to support his conviction for murder. His arguments in favor of that enumeration of error are that no disinterested witnesses testified that they saw Bush kick the victim, and that the testimony of the accomplice who said he saw Bush kick the victim and laugh and brag about it later was not corroborated as is required by OCGA § 24-4-8.
Several disinterested witnesses identified Bush as one of the persons in the smaller group which kicked the victim to death. One of his co-indictees testified that Bush kicked the victim, and Bush himself made a statement to that effect. The jury is the judge of the credibility of witnesses (Brannon v. State, 266 Ga. 667, 668, 469 S.E.2d 676 (1996)), so the truthfulness of those witnesses, including that of Bush's accomplice, was for the jury to decide. Willingham v. State, 262 Ga. 324(2c), 418 S.E.2d 25 (1992). Although Bush attempted to ameliorate the effect of his statement by adding that he did not mean to kick the victim, the jury was entitled to disbelieve the self-serving part of Bush's statement and to believe the part in which he admitted kicking the victim. Brannon, supra.
With regard to the need for corroboration of the accomplice's testimony, we note the following:
It is not required that this corroboration shall of itself be sufficient to warrant a verdict, or that the testimony of the accomplice be corroborated in every...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jenkins v. State
...215 (1963). The record contains sufficient evidence to corroborate the testimony of Terry Roberts, see generally Bush v. State, 267 Ga. 877, 485 S.E.2d 466 (1997) (only slight evidence required); we find no error in the trial court's finding after the State presented its evidence that a pri......
-
Payne v. Chatman, S97A0252
... ... that certain technically moot questions merit review because the error is capable of repetition and yet evades review, is recognized in this State, although it has never been applied to election cases. See Chastain v. Baker, 255 Ga. 432, 433, 339 S.E.2d 241 (1986). We observe that some ... ...
-
Whitehead v. State
...158-159(3), 496 S.E.2d 252 (1998). 18. See also Hufstetler v. State, 274 Ga. 343, 346(3), 553 S.E.2d 801 (2001). 19. Bush v. State, 267 Ga. 877, 878, 485 S.E.2d 466 (1997). 20. See Horne v. State, 237 Ga.App. 844-845(1), 517 S.E.2d 74 (1999). 21. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.......
-
Threatt v. State
...(2007). “It is not required ... that the testimony of the accomplice be corroborated in every material particular.” Bush v. State, 267 Ga. 877, 878, 485 S.E.2d 466 (1997) (citations omitted). Here, if corroboration were required at all, the corroborating evidence was sufficient. Viewed in t......