Johnson v. State

• Decision Date: 19 May 1992
• Docket Number: No. A92A0143,A92A0143
• Citation: 419 S.E.2d 118,204 Ga.App. 277
• Parties: JOHNSON v. The STATE.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Page 118

419 S.E.2d 118

204 Ga.App. 277

JOHNSON v. The STATE.

No. A92A0143.

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

May 19, 1992.

Benjamin Gratz, Jr., Tifton, for appellant.

David E. Perry, Dist. Atty., Melinda I. Ryals, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.

COOPER, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of two counts of the sale of cocaine and was sentenced as a recidivist. He appeals from the entry of judgment on the verdict and sentence, raising three enumerations of error.

1. Appellant first enumerates as error the admission of evidence which allegedly placed appellant's character in issue. Specifically, appellant complains of the testimony of an officer, who assisted in appellant's arrest, that the officer recognized appellant from "pictures we had on file of him." Appellant raised no objection to this testimony at trial. "Objections not raised at trial cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, as they are deemed waived. [Cit.]" Fancher v. State, 190 Ga.App. 438, 439(1), 378 S.E.2d 923 (1989).

Appellant also complains of the admission of his testimony from a hearing prior to the trial wherein, after receiving Miranda warnings, he testified that at the time of one of the sales of cocaine with which he was charged, he was in a nightclub with friends and that he left the club for a few minutes to go to a store to buy a quart of beer. Appellant was then asked whether it took a long time to make a drug transaction, to which appellant replied that it would depend on the circumstances, and further stated, "if I had the drugs myself, it wouldn't take that long, but like if I had to go get them from someone else like the agent said it would take a little bit longer." Appellant contends this testimony also placed his character in issue. In our view, appellant only hypothetically referred to a criminal act. Such testimony was relevant to the alibi defense maintained by appellant at the hearing and was not evidence of general bad character admitted in violation of OCGA § 24-9-20(b). "Admissibility of evidence is a matter which rests largely within the sound discretion of the trial court.... [Cit.]" Lewis v. State, 158 Ga.App. 586, 587(1), 281 S.E.2d 331 (1981). We find no abuse of the trial court's discretion in admitting the testimony.

2. Appellant also contends the court erred in allowing demonstrative evidence, previously admitted into evidence, to be written upon by a witness for the State and thereafter go out with the jury during deliberations. Appellant argues that the jury's consideration of the diagram of the scene of the alleged crimes with the written additions unjustly advantaged the State by speaking to the jury more than once. " '(T)he [trial] transcript demonstrates that (appellant) raised no such specific objection in the trial court. "An enumeration of error complaining of admission of evidence or of documents going out with the jury presents nothing for decision by this court where no objection was made at the trial. (Cits.)" (Cit.) Accordingly, we find this enumeration of error to be without merit. (Cit.)' [Cits.]" Kitchens v. State, 198 Ga.App. 284, 286(5), 401 S.E.2d 552 (1991).

3. Finally, appellant raises the general grounds and argues that the testimony of the GBI agent who made the case against appellant was contradictory and inconsistent. The record shows that the GBI agent was conducting an undercover drug operation and that a confidential informant directed the agent to a location where drugs could be purchased. When the agent and the informant arrived at the location, they observed several men standing around the area, including appellant, who walked over to their car and asked what they were looking for. When the informant answered that they were looking for a "good 20," appellant instructed them to drive down to the end of the street, turn...