Coley v. State, 71767
| Decision Date | 07 April 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 71767,71767 |
| Citation | 344 S.E.2d 490,178 Ga.App. 668 |
| Parties | COLEY v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
James G. Blanchard, Jr., Augusta, for appellant.
Sam B. Sibley, Jr., Dist. Atty., Charles R. Sheppard, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Appellant was convicted of obstruction of an officer in the performance of his official duty by refusing to cooperate with the officer. Appellant contends the evidence is not sufficient to support the verdict and the trial court erred by denying his motion for a directed verdict of acquittal.
Charles Baldwin of the Columbia County Sheriff's Office was dispatched to investigate a domestic disturbance between appellant and his wife. On Baldwin's arrival, appellant and his wife were outside the home of appellant's sister-in-law and appellant was walking toward his pickup truck; the passenger door was open and appellant's wife shouted: "He's got a gun." Baldwin ordered appellant to move away from the truck and he did not do so; Baldwin repeated his order and appellant started walking toward the house. Baldwin ordered appellant twice to stop; when he did not stop Baldwin ran up behind appellant, grabbed him, searched him, and then arrested appellant. Appellant was unarmed, but a .38 calibre pistol with a clip containing five rounds was found under some clothing on the seat of appellant's truck. Appellant was committing no offense when Baldwin arrived at the scene, and made no verbal or physical threats against Baldwin. Appellant's sister-in-law testified, as a State witness, that she saw nothing that was in any way obstructing an officer, and appellant didn't do anything; he was just going to leave.
Appellant testified that when Baldwin arrived he ordered appellant to freeze and put his hands on the truck; within a split second Baldwin repeated the order so appellant closed the truck door, walked over to the house steps and sat down.
OCGA § 16-10-24 provides that a person who knowingly and wilfully obstructs or hinders any law enforcement officer in the lawful discharge of his official duties is guilty of obstructing a law enforcement officer. We find nothing in the evidence here to show that appellant obstructed or hindered Baldwin in any way in the performance of his duty. Appellant did not verbally or physically threaten Baldwin; in fact, appellant did not speak to, or argue with, Baldwin. At most, he did not respond immediately to Baldwin's orders.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Davis v. the State.
...see also Burgess v. State, 290 Ga.App. 24, 27, 658 S.E.2d 809 (2008). 25. (Emphasis supplied.) 26. See. e.g., Coley v. State, 178 Ga.App. 668, 669, 344 S.E.2d 490 (1986) (defendant's mere failure to immediately follow police orders was insufficient to show obstruction). 27. See Webb v. Stat......
-
Skop v. City of Atlanta, Ga
...to be a threat of violence to the officer, which would amount to obstruction or hindrance." (citations omitted)); Coley v. State, 178 Ga.App. 668, 344 S.E.2d 490, 491 (1986) (reversing an obstruction conviction because the defendant "did nothing more than fail to respond immediately to [the......
-
State v. Stone
...(defendant's refusal to unlock door of home for health inspector did not constitute inference with officer); Coley v. State, 178 Ga.App. 668, 344 S.E.2d 490, 491 (1986) (failure to respond to officer's orders to move away from truck, and then to stop walking, did not support conviction for ......
-
West v. State
...was following her.18 West further argues that his actions did not "rise to the level of [o]bstruction," relying on Beckom v. State19 and Coley v. State.20 These cases are factually distinguishable. In Beckom, the defendant initially refused to respond when the police repeatedly knocked on h......