Hayes v. State, A92A1584
| Decision Date | 15 October 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. A92A1584,A92A1584 |
| Citation | 205 Ga.App. 820,423 S.E.2d 729 |
| Parties | HAYES v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Donna L. Avans, Jefferson, for appellant.
Timothy G. Madison, Dist. Atty., Jeffery G. Morrow, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Defendant Timothy Hayes was convicted of possession of cocaine and possession of marijuana in violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act. He appeals the denial of his motion for new trial.
1. Defendant first contends the trial court erred in allowing the State to introduce evidence of a previous crime.
At the hearing on the admissibility of the prior crimes evidence (and again at trial) the State presented testimony that in December 1983 officers obtained a search warrant for defendant's residence. At the time the premises were searched, defendant and two other individuals were present. The search uncovered both marijuana and cocaine at different locations throughout the house as well as various items of drug paraphernalia, including a mirror, razorblade and tray located on a shelf in defendant's bedroom. Defendant admitted the drugs were his and entered a guilty plea to the offenses of possession of cocaine and possession of marijuana in early 1984. The present offenses occurred approximately seven years later when police again obtained a warrant for the search of defendant's residence. Defendant was not home at the time of the search, but Keith Rice, a friend of defendant, was present. During the search officers discovered various items of drug paraphernalia throughout the residence including a mirror and razorblade which were found on the mantle in defendant's bedroom. A white substance adhering to the razorblade was subsequently identified as cocaine. Two marijuana plants were found growing in a bucket in defendant's bedroom closet. Defendant admitted at trial that the marijuana and items of drug paraphernalia were his, but denied any knowledge of the cocaine. Keith Rice testified at trial and admitted he had purchased the cocaine and brought it to defendant's house, and testified that the night before the search both he and the defendant snorted the cocaine using defendant's razorblade and mirror to lay out the lines of cocaine.
Defendant argues it was reversible error for the trial court to admit evidence of the prior cocaine possession charge because the State failed to articulate the specific purpose for which the evidence was being offered and because there was no legitimate purpose warranting admission of the evidence. The record shows that on several different occasions during the hearing to determine the admissibility of the similar crimes evidence the prosecutor articulated the purpose for which the evidence was being introduced, and that the prosecutor specifically stated that the evidence was being offered to show motive, intent, bent of mind and course of conduct. Contrary to defendant's contention on appeal, we do not think the fact that the prosecutor articulated more than one purpose (motive, intent, bent of mind, course of conduct) for the admission of the evidence "was tantamount to not stating the ... purpose at all...." The trial court ruled the evidence admissible to show intent, motive, similarity of circumstances and knowledge. We agree Poole v. State, 201 Ga.App. 554(2), 411 S.E.2d 562 (1991). See also Hickey v. State, 202 Ga.App. 636, 415 S.E.2d 60 (1992); Banks v. State, 201 Ga.App. 266(1), 410 S.E.2d 818 (1991); Faison v. State, 199 Ga.App. 447(1), 405 S.E.2d 277 (1991). Consequently, this enumeration of error is without merit.
2. Defendant...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
J.B., In Interest of, A96A1304
...some evidence of corroboration exists, this court will uphold the verdict." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Hayes v. State, 205 Ga.App. 820, 822(2), 423 S.E.2d 729 (1992). In this case, the evidence corroborating the accomplice's testimony, though not overwhelming, is sufficient to supp......
-
Bedingfield v. State
...doubt of possessing cocaine. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); Hayes v. State, 205 Ga.App. 820, 821-822(2), 423 S.E.2d 729 (1992). 2. Bedingfield contends the court erred in denying his motion to suppress the cocaine and other items found in Underw......
-
Curtis v. State
...(2000), Jones's testimony provided direct evidence that Curtis possessed more than an ounce of a marijuana. See Hayes v. State, 205 Ga.App. 820, 821(2), 423 S.E.2d 729 (1992). Curtis nevertheless contends that Jones was an accomplice whose uncorroborated testimony could not support a findin......
- Wimberly v. State