Hines v. State

Decision Date10 May 1985
Docket NumberNo. 42089,42089
Citation329 S.E.2d 479,254 Ga. 386
PartiesHINES v. The STATE.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Jerry W. Brimberry, Brimberry, Kaplan, MacDougald & Revell, P.C., Albany, for Robert Earl Hines.

Hobart M. Hind, D.A. Dist. Atty., Albany, John W. Hogg, L. Earl Jones, Asst. Dist. Attys., Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., Eddie Snelling, Jr., Sr. Atty., for the State.

MARSHALL, Presiding Justice.

Robert Earl Hines appeals from his conviction of malice murder and his sentence of life imprisonment.

1. Absent written requests, it was not error to refuse to charge on the lesser included offenses of voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. Buxton v. State, 253 Ga. 137, 140(5), 317 S.E.2d 538 (1984), citing State v. Stonaker, 236 Ga. 1, 222 S.E.2d 354 (1976).

2. Evidence was adduced at the trial as follows. The appellant had dated Louise Brown Johnson, the sister of victim Alfonzo Brown, for approximately 15 months. She had sought to terminate the relationship due to several aggressive physical encounters toward her by the appellant, who had stated that he could kill her. Sometime after 1:30 a.m. on March 22, 1984--after Ms. Johnson had returned to her apartment having spent the earlier evening hours with a friend, James Miller--her brother, Alfonzo, who was very intoxicated, knocked on her front door. When she let him in, the appellant, who was with him, came in also, insisting on talking with her. She refused to talk with him, and, at Alfonzo's instruction, she went into her bedroom and closed the door. The appellant and the victim both fell asleep, whereupon Ms. Johnson carried the telephone into the bathroom and called Mr. Miller. The appellant broke into the bathroom, jealously demanding to know who was on the telephone, threw the 'phone down, and picked up an extension 'phone elsewhere in an effort to find out. When the appellant saw Louise trying to awaken her brother, he went into the kitchen, got a knife out of a drawer, and began stabbing Alfonzo, resulting in his death from 18 wounds, approximately six of which were to the victim's back area. Mr. Miller testified that, over the telephone, he heard Louise state, "No, please don't do that, please don't hurt my brother." Neither Louise nor Alfonzo was armed. Louise, who was also cut during the appellant's attack on Alfonzo, lay on the floor feigning death while the appellant went to the kitchen for water and paper towels to clean up the blood. The appellant then kicked Louise, who moved, revealing that she was still alive, whereupon he said, "No, you ain't, bitch, you ain't dead yet, but you're going to die." Subsequently, he attempted to have sex with her, forced her to commit oral sodomy, urinated on her, and refused to let her telephone for help. When she was finally able, via the telephone, to get the appellant's brother to come over, the appellant allowed him to summon medical assistance, but insisted that he not call the police. Louise testified that she could not have escaped from the appellant in the physical condition in which the appellant had left her.

The appellant argues that the trial resolved into a "swearing contest" between Louise and himself, and that the verdict of guilty of murder is inconsistent with the verdicts of not guilty of the charges of aggravated assault and aggravated sodomy against Louise, because proof of all of the charges depended upon...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • McElrath v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • February 28, 2020
    ...abolished the rule that inconsistent verdicts in irreconcilable conflict in criminal cases warranted reversal (see Hines v. State , 254 Ga. 386, 387, 329 S.E.2d 479 (1985) ), adopting the rationale set out by the U. S. Supreme Court in United States v. Powell , [supra], in its exercise of s......
  • Turner v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • January 8, 2008
    ...abolished the rule that inconsistent verdicts in irreconcilable conflict in criminal cases warranted reversal (see Hines v. State, 254 Ga. 386, 387, 329 S.E.2d 479 (1985)), adopting the rationale set out by the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Powell, 469 U.S. 57, 105 S.Ct. 471, 83 L.......
  • McNeal v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • January 5, 2022
    ...argument lacks merit. Pretermitting whether this would have amounted to an inconsistent verdict, see generally Hines v. State , 254 Ga. 386, 387 (2), 329 S.E.2d 479 (1985), the inconsistent verdict rule has long been abolished in Georgia. See Milam v. State , 255 Ga. 560, 562 (2), 341 S.E.2......
  • Milam v. State, 42652
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • March 12, 1986
    ...of error, Milam argues that the verdicts are inconsistent. We find no error. In a special concurrence to Hines v. State, 254 Ga. 386, 387-88, 329 S.E.2d 479 (1985), Chief Justice Hill stated that he "would abolish our inconsistent verdict rule in criminal cases. See Dunn v. United States, 2......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT