Jackson v. State
| Decision Date | 08 September 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. A92A0960,A92A0960 |
| Citation | 205 Ga.App. 827,424 S.E.2d 6 |
| Parties | JACKSON v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
William J. Mason, for appellant.
Douglas C. Pullen, Dist. Atty., J. Mark Shelnutt, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Deryk Jackson was convicted of aggravated assault and reckless conduct, and he appeals from the trial court's denial of his motion for a new trial.
Construed to support the jury's verdict, the evidence adduced at trial showed that Darrell Austin had gone to visit his young son at an apartment complex in Columbus and became involved in an argument with his son's mother. When the argument spread to include her current boyfriend, who was appellant's cousin, several people were nearby, including appellant and his brother Terrance. Appellant and Terrance intervened on behalf of their cousin, and the argument became physical. Austin testified that Terrance knocked his teeth out and appellant hit him in the head, whereupon he ran to his aunt's apartment in the same complex and told his aunt, Andrea James, and his brother what had happened. Austin testified that his brother had a "quick attitude," became enraged, and immediately left to see the Jackson brothers. Both Austin and James followed, Austin on foot and James in her car. Austin testified that he and his brother were unarmed; that appellant had a gun in his hand when Austin first saw him upon his return to the scene and immediately began shooting directly at Austin and shouting that he was going to kill him; and that he feared for his life. James testified that Austin's brother had a bat when he left the house, and that as she turned the corner in her car she saw appellant shoot into the air once near her car and then fire again several times, directly at Austin.
Appellant and other defense witnesses testified he did not have a gun and did not shoot, but ran from the scene when he was surrounded by people armed with bats, sticks, and chains.
1. Appellant first enumerates the general grounds.
(a) Although the evidence regarding the aggravated assault on Austin was in sharp conflict, an appellate court does not weigh the evidence or pass on witnesses' credibility. It determines only the sufficiency of the evidence. Fitz v. State, 201 Ga.App. 83, 85, 410 S.E.2d 186 (1991). We hold the evidence was sufficient to authorize a conviction on the assault charge under the standard set forth in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). See Collins v. State, 191 Ga.App. 272-273, 274(3), 381 S.E.2d 555 (1989).
(b) The indictment charged appellant with the offense of reckless conduct in that he did "endanger the bodily safety of Andrea James ... by consciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk that his act, to-wit: firing a pistol in [her] direction ... would endanger [her] safety." Appellant argues that because James testified that appellant shot first in the air and then directly at Austin, the State did not prove the allegations in the indictment with regard to the reckless conduct charge. We do not agree. Although James testified that she did not think he was deliberately firing at her, because he did not know her, she did testify that appellant fired a shot in the vicinity of her car, causing her to fear for her life. We find this evidence sufficient to authorize the jury to convict appellant of the reckless conduct charge as alleged in the indictment under the standard set forth in Jackson, supra. See McCane v. State, 147 Ga.App. 730(1), 250 S.E.2d 181 (1978). Compare Miller v. State, 200 Ga.App. 57, 406 S.E.2d 565 (1991).
2. We find no merit in appellant's contention that the trial court violated the rule recently set forth in Stephens v. State, 261 Ga. 467, 468-469(6), 405 S.E.2d 483 (1991), by admitting into evidence as a similar transaction a certified copy of appellant's prior conviction of aggravated assault. In Stephens the Supreme Court held that the State's establishment at a pretrial hearing of a prima facie case of similarity does not satisfy...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Walker v. State
...we must assume the ruling of the trial court is supported by the evidence." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Jackson v. State, 205 Ga.App. 827, 829(3), 424 S.E.2d 6 (1992). 4. Lastly, Walker, an African-American, maintains that the trial court committed reversible error when the court re......
-
Stubbs v. State
...of opinion. Such testimony supports an essential element of many crimes, including reckless conduct, see Jackson v. State, 205 Ga.App. 827, 828(1)(b), 424 S.E.2d 6 (1992), and robbery by intimidation, OCGA § 16-8-40(a)(2), as well as such defenses as self-defense, OCGA § 16-3-21, and coerci......
-
Jackson v. State
...personal knowledge of three of the four burglaries, his testimony as to those three offenses was not hearsay. See Jackson v. State, 205 Ga.App. 827, 828, 424 S.E.2d 6 (1992); compare Bowdry v. State, 211 Ga.App. 626, 440 S.E.2d 59 (1994). But the investigator admitted during the similar tra......
-
Vaughn v. State
...evidence." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Walker v. State, 215 Ga.App. 790, 792(3), 452 S.E.2d 580 (1994); Jackson v. State, 205 Ga.App. 827, 829(3), 424 S.E.2d 6 (1992). Judgment BIRDSONG, P.J., and ELDRIDGE, J., concur. ...