McKay v. State, A98A0902.
Decision Date | 29 September 1998 |
Docket Number | No. A98A0902.,A98A0902. |
Parties | McKAY v. The STATE. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
June E. Fogle, for appellant.
Spencer Lawton, Jr., District Attorney, Michael K. Dennard, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee. RUFFIN, Judge.
A jury found Tyrone McKay guilty of selling marijuana in violation of OCGA § 16-13-30(j)(1) (Count 1) and selling marijuana within 1,000 feet of a housing project in violation of OCGA § 16-13-32.5 (Count 2). The trial court sentenced McKay as a recidivist. McKay appeals, asserting (1) there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions, (2) the indictment on Count 2 was insufficient, and (3) the State failed to prove the voluntariness of prior pleas for use in recidivist sentencing. For reasons which follow, we affirm.
1. " Shabazz v. State, 229 Ga. App. 465-466(1), 494 S.E.2d 257 (1997).
Viewed in this light, the record shows undercover agents Quarterman and Lucas drove past an unoccupied building located at 603 Emerald Drive. Agent Quarterman noticed three individuals seated in a white Buick which was parked in front of the building. He also saw Tyrone McKay and Akeem Williams standing outside of the car facing one another. Quarterman testified that, after parking behind the Buick, he "observed Mr. McKay pass Mr. Williams one bag of marijuana, and ... Mr. Williams pass Mr. McKay some paper currency." Quarterman witnessed the exchange from a distance of approximately ten to fifteen feet. Quarterman testified that McKay and Williams were standing approximately 20 feet from the building located at 603A Emerald Drive at the time of the exchange.
When Williams started to walk toward the Buick, Quarterman drove his vehicle alongside the Buick. As Williams entered the right rear passenger compartment of the Buick, Quarterman saw him holding the bag of marijuana in his right hand. When the Buick drove away, Quarterman followed. He also called a "reaction take-down team" and provided them with a description of the Buick. When the reaction take-down team stopped the Buick approximately two blocks away, Quarterman exited his undercover vehicle, approached the rear passenger compartment of the Buick, opened the door, and asked Williams to step out. When Williams stepped out, "he dropped the bag of marijuana to the ground." Quarterman retrieved it and arrested Williams. The contents of this bag tested positive for the presence of marijuana.
After arresting Williams, Agents Quarterman and Lucas, along with two other agents, returned to 603 Emerald Drive and found McKay standing in front of the building. When Quarterman approached McKay, he stated McKay immediately raised his hand and said, "I didn't sell my man no weed." The agents then placed McKay under arrest.
Jeffrey Barker, the chief construction inspector for the Housing Authority of Savannah, testified that State's Exhibit 1 was a copy of a map for Frazier Homes and that Frazier Homes is a public housing project. Barker explained that the map was prepared from blueprints which were drawn to scale and prepared by architects. Barker further testified that he was personally familiar with the area depicted in Exhibit 1 and that it appeared to be accurate and correct. These blueprints show a building located at 603A and 603B Emerald Drive. This exhibit was admitted into evidence.
We find this evidence sufficient to support McKay's convictions under OCGA §§ 16-13-30(j)(1) and 16-13-32.5. Jackson v. Virginia, supra.
2. McKay contends Count 2 of the indictment fails to allege a violation of OCGA § 16-13-32.5(b). Count 2 charges McKay with the offense of "SALE OF MARIJUANA WITHIN 1000 FEET OF A HOUSING PROJECT OCGA § 16-13-32.5." It further alleges that "TYRONE A. MCKAY AKA JAUDON ANTHONY MCKAY ... on or about September 27, 1995, did unlawfully sell marijuana, within 1000 feet of a housing project...." McKay asserts Count 2 of the indictment is insufficient because it alleges an unlawful sale of marijuana, and OCGA § 16-13-32.5(b) makes it unlawful only to "manufacture, distribute, dispense, or possess with intent to distribute ... marijuana... in, on, or within 1000 feet of any real property of any publicly owned or publicly operated housing project...." OCGA § 16-13-32.5(b).
We must first determine whether this enumeration has been preserved for our review. The State claims McKay failed to preserve this issue because he raised it for the first time on appeal. McKay contends he preserved it through a motion for directed verdict of acquittal. However, the record shows that McKay never challenged the validity of the indictment in this motion. McKay did file a one-page motion for new trial in which he asserted "[t]he verdict is contrary to law." After a hearing, the trial court denied this motion in a one-line order. The record contains no transcript of the hearing and no information about the specific grounds for McKay's new trial motion.
In Georgia, a defendant has a right to be tried upon an indictment which is perfect in form and substance. State v. Black, 149 Ga.App. 389, 391(4), 254 S.E.2d 506 (1979); State v. Stamey, 211 Ga.App. 837, 838(1), 440 S.E.2d 725 (1994). However, this right can, under certain circumstances, be waived if a defendant fails to timely challenge the indictment. See Lanier v. State, 5 Ga.App. 472, 476-477, 63 S.E. 536 (1909).
A challenge to an indictment is typically made through a demurrer to the indictment. State v. Eubanks, 239 Ga. 483, 485, 238 S.E.2d 38 ( 1977). See also OCGA §§ 17-7-113;1 17-7-111;2 Uniform Superior Court Rule 31.1.3
"[A] special demurrer is waived if not raised before pleading to the merits of the indictment." Eubanks, supra at 486, 238 S.E.2d 38. On the other hand, because a Id. at 485-486, 238 S.E.2d 38. Likewise, an oral objection or motion to quash based upon the same grounds as a general demurrer can be asserted anytime during the trial. Gilmore v. State, 118 Ga. 299-300(1), 45 S.E. 226 (1903); Pullen v. State, 199 Ga.App. 881, 406 S.E.2d 283 (1991). Compare Perkins v. State, 151 Ga.App. 199, 206(7), 259 S.E.2d 193 (1979) (, )overruled on other grounds, Chance v. State, 154 Ga.App. 543, 544, 268 S.E.2d 737 (1980).
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lynch v. State
...the accusation.").41 Barker , 277 Ga. App. at 87 (3), 625 S.E.2d 500 (punctuation and footnote omitted). See McKay v. State , 234 Ga. App. 556, 558-559 (2), 507 S.E.2d 484 (1998) (A general demurrer challenges the legality of an indictment and may be raised anytime before or during trial, a......
- Mitchell v. State
-
Lynch v. State, A18A0286
...pleaded in the accusation.").41 Barker , 277 Ga. App. at 87 (3), 625 S.E.2d 500 (punctuation and footnote omitted). See McKay v. State , 234 Ga. App. 556, 558-559 (2), 507 S.E.2d 484 (1998) (A general demurrer challenges the legality of an indictment and may be raised anytime before or duri......
-
Von Thomas v. State
...(2010); Thompson, 294 Ga.App. at 771(3), 670 S.E.2d 226;Harden v. State, 239 Ga.App. 700, 701(2), 521 S.E.2d 829 (1999); McKay v. State, 234 Ga.App. 556, 560(3), 507 S.E.2d 484 (1998). And most important for the purposes of this case, both courts have held that a defendant can waive a claim......