Farrier v. State, S00A1526.
| Decision Date | 08 January 2001 |
| Docket Number | No. S00A1526.,S00A1526. |
| Parties | FARRIER v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Elliott A. Shoenthal, Decatur, for appellant.
J. Tom Morgan, District Attorney, Barbara B. Conroy, Robert E. Statham, III, Kristin L. Wood, Assistant District Attorneys, Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, Paula K. Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tammie J. Philbrick, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
This appeal is from Kent Farrier's conviction for malice murder, unlawful possession of a firearm (sawed-off shotgun), and possession of a firearm by a first offender probationer.1 Evidence adduced at trial established the following narrative as fact. After an argument between Farrier's friend Norton and McArthur's friend Castro was stopped by security guards, both groups left in cars. Norton overtook McArthur's vehicle, then slowed in front of him. When McArthur pulled even with Norton's car, Farrier extended a sawed-off shotgun from his window and shot McArthur in the head. Farrier later gave the shotgun to his uncle, from whom the police recovered it. Farrier was, at the time of the shooting, on first offender probation for theft by receiving.
1. The evidence recounted above was sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find Farrier guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the offenses for which he stands convicted. Adams v. State, 264 Ga. 71(2), 440 S.E.2d 639 (1994); Laney v. State, 271 Ga. 194(1), 515 S.E.2d 610 (1999); Anderson v. State, 237 Ga.App. 595(3), 516 S.E.2d 315 (1999).
2. Farrier complains in three enumerations of error of the trial court's instructions to the jury. He contends that the instruction on possession of a firearm by a first offender probationer as a predicate to felony murder, a charge on constructive possession, and the jury charge as a whole misled the jury to his prejudice.
Whether there was error in the charge on possession of a firearm by a first offender probationer as a predicate offense of felony murder is a moot question since Farrier was convicted of malice murder (Spencer v. State, 268 Ga. 85(4), 485 S.E.2d 477 (1997)) and was acquitted of the felony murder count predicated on the possession offense.
Because possession of the sawed-off shotgun was a necessary element of the unlawful possession count, charging the jury on both actual and constructive possession was appropriate. See Waugh v. State, 218 Ga. App. 301(4), 460 S.E.2d 871 (1995).
Here, as in Weems v. State, 267 Ga. 182(3), 476 S.E.2d 585 (1996), "a complete review of the trial court's charge shows that it was neither confusing nor misleading and that it provided full and fair instruction on the issues in the case."
3. Finally, Farrier complains that the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel. To succeed on such a claim, a defendant must show both that counsel's performance was deficient and that the deficiency prejudiced the defense. Gaines v. Sikes, 272 Ga. 123(2), 526 S.E.2d 558 (2000). Farrier's complaint that trial counsel failed to reserve objections to jury charges fails to meet the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Miller v. State
...it to police for that purpose, and that he had the power and intention to exercise authority over the weapon. See Farrier v. State, 273 Ga. 302(2), 540 S.E.2d 596 (2001); Deering v. State, 244 Ga.App. 30, 32(2), 535 S.E.2d 4 Miller also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence of theft by......
-
Ros v. State
...was neither confusing nor misleading and that it provided full and fair instruction on the issues in the case.'" Farrier v. State, 273 Ga. 302, 303(2), 540 S.E.2d 596 (2001). 6. Tran contends he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel, asserting interrelated arguments involving cou......
-
Adams v. State, No. A06A2447.
...driving.22 This enumeration of error, however, is moot in light of the jury's acquittal of Adams on the aggressive driving count. See Farrier v. State.23 7. In his sixth enumeration of error, Adams argues that the trial court erred by improperly communicating with the jury without the accus......
-
Barrett v. State
...did not clearly err in concluding that Barrett failed to show ineffectiveness of his trial counsel. See, e.g., Farrier v. State, 273 Ga. 302, 303(3), 540 S.E.2d 596 (2001). (c) Allegations Unsupported by the Record. Barrett urges that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to ensure ......