Grissom v. State
| Decision Date | 23 June 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 76309,76309 |
| Citation | 187 Ga.App. 653,371 S.E.2d 137 |
| Parties | GRISSOM v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Tony H. Hight, Perry, for appellant.
Robert E. Wilson, Dist. Atty., Barbara B. Conroy, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Appellant was convicted of rape, aggravated sodomy, false imprisonment and simple battery.
1. In three enumerations of error appellant contends the trial court erred by denying his motion for a directed verdict of acquittal because the evidence was not sufficient to support the verdict and venue was not established. Appellant's contention as to venue is not supported by the transcript, which shows that a police officer testified that the house address where the offenses occurred was in DeKalb County.
The evidence disclosed that after offering to take the victim home from a "shot house," appellant and his half-brother, Walter Osby, drove the victim instead to Osby's home. The victim agreed to go in Osby's house for a few minutes, and when they entered, appellant went to take a shower. Osby and the victim went into the den, where Osby started making sexual advances to the victim, which she rejected. Osby then forcibly pulled down the victim's slacks and panties and committed oral sodomy on her. Appellant returned from his shower and he and Osby forcibly removed the victim's clothing and carried her into a bedroom. The victim testified that Osby raped her twice over a period of three hours, and appellant forced her to commit oral sodomy on him by choking the victim until she committed the act. Appellant subsequently raped the victim. Osby took the victim by the arm into the den to retrieve her clothing, then led her back into the bedroom. The victim was threatened by appellant, and was directed by both men not to touch the bedroom door during brief periods when they would leave the room. During one of those absences the victim got dressed, except for her brassiere, and escaped by climbing out the bedroom window and dropping several feet to the ground. She went next door and was allowed by the occupant to use the telephone to call the police, after informing the occupant that she had been raped. The victim was kept in Osby's house for approximately four hours before her escape. Police found the victim's brassiere in the bedroom of Osby's house.
Both Osby and appellant made written statements to the police admitting that they had sexual intercourse with the victim, but stating that it was with her consent. Osby also admitted committing an act of sodomy, but appellant denied that he committed sodomy. Appellant testified to essentially the same facts as contained in his statement, and also testified that after he had intercourse with the victim, she asked him for $50.
The primary issue in this case was one of credibility of witnesses, since the victim testified that the acts were committed forcibly and against her will, while appellant testified the acts were all with the victim's consent. The victim's testimony was corroborated in many respects, and in regard to the charge of false imprisonment, a person commits that offense when, in violation of the personal liberty of another, he arrests, confines or detains such person without legal authority. OCGA § 16-5-4. The evidence shows that the victim was kept in the bedroom for almost four hours before she was able to escape. Thus, we find the evidence sufficient to meet the standard of proof required by Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560. Accordingly, it was not error to deny appellant's motions for a directed verdict of acquittal. Eaton v. State, 184 Ga.App. 645, 647(3), 362 S.E.2d 375 (1987).
2. Appellant alleges the trial court erred by refusing to make prior statements of the victim available for cross-examination. Prior to trial appellant filed a motion to produce requesting, among other things, all written statements of witnesses in possession of the prosecuting attorney. At a hearing before the jury was finally selected, the court asked if it needed to make an in camera inspection of the prosecuting attorney's file as to any exculpatory material. Appellant's counsel responded that he had not received a copy of a document from the doctor at Grady Hospital who examined the victim. Subsequently, counsel reported to the court that he had spoken with the doctor and was ready to proceed. The court then stated that it had examined the State's file for exculpatory matters and found nothing that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Grier v. State
...verdict that defendant is guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, of false imprisonment as alleged in the indictment. Grissom v. State, 187 Ga.App. 653(1), 654, 371 S.E.2d 137. It follows that the trial court correctly denied defendant's motion for directed verdict as to the charge of false impr......
-
Belins v. State
...in criminal cases, unless such evidence is exculpatory. Walter v. State, 256 Ga. 666, 668(1), 352 S.E.2d 570; Grissom v. State, 187 Ga.App. 653, 655(2), 371 S.E.2d 137. Exculpatory or favorable witness statements are subject to disclosure under the due process constraints imposed upon state......
-
Laredo v. State
...jury could find that Laredo deprived the victim of personal liberty by confining and detaining her without legal authority to do so. See Grissom v. State1 (confinement in a bedroom for four hours after a rape was sufficient). Notwithstanding Laredo's contention to the contrary, this evidenc......
- Inman v. State, s. 76220