Heard v. State
| Decision Date | 08 April 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 43930,43930 |
| Citation | 354 S.E.2d 115,257 Ga. 1 |
| Parties | HEARD v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Floyd W. Keeble, Jr., Daniel J. Parker, Royston, for Bennie Frank heard.
Lindsey A. Tise, Dist. Atty., Elberton, Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., Dennis R. Dunn, Asst. Atty.Gen., for the State.
An Elbert County jury found the appellant, Bennie Heard, guilty of the murder of Raymond Winn. 1 He raises two issues on appeal. We affirm.
During a card game at the Sugar Shack in Elbert County, the victim's brother, Neal, accused Heard of cheating. Heard, aware of Neal's propensity to carry and use a gun, 2 returned some of his winnings for the day to the Winn brothers. Heard denied that he had cheated and left the Sugar Shack.
Heard went to a pawnshop where he attempted to purchase a pistol. He was refused becaue he did not have a driver's license. Hodges Heard, who had joined Bennie Heard at the pawn shop, did purchase a pistol twenty to thirty minutes after Bennie Heard's inquiry. Around thirty minutes after Hodges Heard had bought the pistol, Bennie Heard reappeared at the pawn shop and purchased a box of bullets for the exact type of pistol that Hodges had bought.
Late that evening, Bennie Heard returned to the Sugar Shack and rejoined the card game in which the Winn brothers were involved. After a few hands, Heard pulled out a pistol. All of the players ran, except for Raymond Winn, who was acknowledged to be a friend of Bennie's. Some witnesses testified that Heard shot Raymond as he moved towards Heard. Other witnesses testified that Heard's pistol fired after Raymond hit Heard's arm. Raymond died from the effects of a single gunshot wound.
1. We find the evidence adduced at trial sufficient to support the jury verdict under the standard established in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979).
2. Heard claims that the trial court should not have admitted into evidence two photographs of the victim revealing a tracheotomy incision made into the victim's neck.
The tracheotomy was apparently performed by medical authorities in an attempt to save the victim's life. The state introduced the photographs into evidence to show splatter and burn marks on the victim's ear. The photographs could have easily been cropped to exclude the view of the hole in the victim's throat without interfering at all with the view of the bullet wound and the damage caused by the bullet.
In Brown v. State, 250 Ga. 862, 867, 302 S.E.2d 347 (1983), we held: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Roper v. State
...damage to the victim's body that was not caused by the assailant, Brown v. State, 250 Ga. 862, 302 S.E.2d 347 (1983); Heard v. State, 257 Ga. 1, 354 S.E.2d 115 (1987). Here, however, the damage inflicted by the elements during the two days prior to the discovery of Jackson's body was minima......
-
Kirkland v. State
...such as the placement of casts and bandages, to such mutilation as had been inflicted by appellant. Compare Heard v. State, 257 Ga. 1, 2 (2a), 354 S.E.2d 115 (1987). In any event, there is no contention that the photographs could easily have been cropped to mask all but the injuries sustain......
-
Mitchell v. State
...was shown by DNA to be the victim's blood. Furthermore, admission of the photograph did not conflict with the holdings in Heard v. State, 257 Ga. 1, 354 S.E.2d 115 or Roundtree v. State, 181 Ga.App. 594, 353 S.E.2d 88, cases involving distinguishable factual 4. During the jury selection pro......
-
Watson v. State, A92A1605
..."thoracotomy" which had been performed by medical authorities in an attempt to save the victim's life. See generally Heard v. State, 257 Ga. 1, 2 (2), 354 S.E.2d 115 (1987). However, appellant "did not object to the admission of this photograph at trial, on this ... ground." Taylor v. State......