Davis v. State
| Decision Date | 05 February 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 29557,29557 |
| Citation | 212 S.E.2d 814,233 Ga. 638 |
| Parties | Oliver DAVIS v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Lovett & New, Walter H. New, Quitman, for appellant.
H. Lamar Cole, Dist. Atty., William O. Hitchcock, Asst. Dist. Atty., Valdosta, Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Lois F. Oakley, Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
Oliver Davis was convicted of the murder of Charles Daniels and sentenced to life imprisonment.
The evidence shows that the victim was killed by a .22 caliber bullet which entered his body at the base of the neck, and pierced his spinal cord. The victim and the defendant did not get along well and the day before the homicide the defendant pointed his grandfather's rifle at him and told him, 'I am going to shoot you.' On Sunday, March 24, 1974, the defendant and his sisters, Janice and Lillian, were returning to their home after church. They lived in the home with their grandfather. The victim and his friend Joe Henry Johnson approached the Davis residence where they met the defendant's sisters. After entering the residence, Joe Henry went into the bathroom to pur some Noxzema on his fact. He was conversing with the victim who was standing in the bathroom doorway. The victim walked away from the bathroom and Joe Henry heard a gunshot, saw the victim fall, and saw the defendant standing in the adjoining room. Lillian was in another room, heard the gunshot, heard something hit the floor and heard Joe Henry say, 'Lillian, Oliver done shot Charles.' Lillian saw the defendant pointing the gun toward the victim as she entered the room and saw him put the gun back in the room where he slept. She picket up the gun, smelled it and testified that it smelled like it had been burning. She went to the church and got her grandfather. When the grandfather arrived at the home, she heard him ask the defendant if he had killed the victim and the said that he had. Held:
1. The evidence was sufficient to authorize the verdict and the trial court did not err in overruling the motion for a directed verdict of acquittal and the motion for a new trial.
The defendant argues, however, that there is no evidence of an intention to kill. 'To kill by using a deadly weapon in a manner likely to produce death, will raise a presumption of intention to kill.' Moon v. State,68 Ga. 687(7); Barbee v. State, 175 Ga. 307, 165 S.E. 232; Plummer v. State, 200 ga. 641(1), 38 S.E.2d 411; Carrigan v. State, 206 Ga. 707, 58 S.E.2d 407; Fisher v. State, 228 Ga. 100(2), 184 S.E.2d 156; Chandle v. State, 230 Ga. 574(1), 198 S.E.2d 289; Wilburn v. State, 230 Ga. 675(1), 198 S.E.2d 857. There is no merit in this contention.
2. Evidence was introduced which showed that the defendant had threatened to shoot some other boys; that the day before the homicide he told the victim he was going to shoot him; that Thursday before the homicide on Sunday, the defendant shot at one boy from his home; that two weeks before the homicide he shot at another boy; that the defendant 'played' with his grandfather's rifle and frequently ran boys up and down the road with it. The defendant objected to the admission of this evidence on the basis it placed his character in evidence.
This evidence was admissible to show intent, motive, plan, scheme and bent of mind of the defendant. Williams v. State, 152 Ga. 498(1), 110 S.E. 286; Allen v. State, 201 Ga. 391(1), 40 S.E.2d 144; Lyles v. State, 215 Ga. 229(2), 109 S.E.2d 785; Anderson v. State, 222 Ga. 561, 150 S.E.2d 638; Gunter v. State, 223 Ga. 290, 154 S.E.2d 608; Hicks v. State, 232 Ga. 393, 207 S.E.2d 30; Hunt v. State, 233 Ga. 329, 211 S.E.2d 288.
3. The state introduced in evidence a diagram of the house where the homicide occurred and the positions of the people in the house were indicated on it. The defendant objected to the introduction of the diagram on the ground that no one had testified that he was in the position indicated on the diagram. There is no merit in this contention. Joe Henry Johnson's testimony was that the defendant was at the place indicated on the diagram. The diagram was also...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Potts v. State
...criminal conduct on the part of the one who made the statement. Bell v. State, 234 Ga. 473, 216 S.E.2d 279 (1975); Davis v. State, 233 Ga. 638, 212 S.E.2d 814 (1975); Shouse v. State, 231 Ga. 716, 719, 203 S.E.2d 537, supra (1974). Appellant's enumeration of error is without 5. Appellant's ......
-
Gaddy v. Linahan, 83-8660
...Patterson v. State, 239 Ga. 409, 238 S.E.2d 2 (1977); Davis v. State, 237 Ga. 279, 227 S.E.2d 249 (1976) (per curiam); Davis v. State, 233 Ga. 638, 212 S.E.2d 814 (1975). ...
-
Blake v. State
...if such testimony aids in identification or shows the state of mind, plan, motive or scheme of the accused. Davis v. State, 233 Ga. 638, 639(2), 212 S.E.2d 814 (1974); McNeal v. State, 228 Ga. 633, 187 S.E.2d 271 (1972); Atkins v. State, 236 Ga. 624, 625, 225 S.E.2d 7 (1976); Moore v. State......
-
Causey v. State
...scheme and bent of mind is admissible although such evidence may also place in issue the character of the defendant. Davis v. State, 233 Ga. 638, 212 S.E.2d 814 (1975); Rini v. State, 236 Ga. 715, 225 S.E.2d 234 (1976). In this case the intended object of the alleged conspiracy to commit mu......