Mickens v. State, S04A0275.
| Court | Supreme Court of Georgia |
| Citation | 277 Ga. 627,593 S.E.2d 350 |
| Docket Number | No. S04A0275.,S04A0275. |
| Parties | MICKENS v. The STATE. |
| Decision Date | 01 March 2004 |
593 S.E.2d 350
277 Ga. 627
v.
The STATE
No. S04A0275.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
March 1, 2004.
Kenneth B. Hodges, III, Dist. Atty., Gregory W. Edwards, Asst. Dist. Atty., Thurbert E. Baker, Atty. Gen., Frank M. Gaither, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
HINES, Justice.
A jury found Carl Mickens guilty of two counts of felony murder, arson in the first degree, burglary, and terroristic threats in connection with the deaths of Roderick Green and his young son, Roderick Green, Jr. Mickens was sentenced for the felony murders and for terroristic threats. He appeals his convictions solely on the basis of the sufficiency of the evidence. Finding the evidence of Mickens's guilt sufficient to sustain the convictions, we affirm.1
When evaluating the sufficiency of evidence, the proper standard for review is whether a rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). This Court does not reweigh evidence or resolve conflicts [277 Ga. 628] in testimony; instead, evidence is reviewed in a light most favorable to the verdict, with deference to the jury's assessment of the weight and credibility of the evidence. Cimildoro v. State, 259 Ga. 788, 387 S.E.2d 335 (1990).
Dean v. State, 273 Ga. 806-807, 546 S.E.2d 499 (2001).
The evidence construed in favor of the verdicts showed that Carl Mickens met Vickie Green in the fall of 1997, while they were both employed at a grocery store. Soon after beginning an intimate relationship, Mickens became violent toward Green. He would shove, pull, and bite her, and he also stole money from her. On more than one occasion, Mickens threatened to burn down Green's mobile home.
On January 4, 1998, Mickens went to Green's mobile home and took her glasses, identification card, and keys, and ran out the door. Mickens's cousin, Tommy Baisden, drove him to a store, where Mickens made a duplicate of Green's house key and purchased lighter fluid. When Baisden asked Mickens what he intended to do, Mickens responded that he "was going to burn Vickie up," and "That b____ must don't know who she f _____ with. I will f____ her up." Baisden was able to dissuade Mickens from burning down the mobile home that day.
Green notified police of the theft but she did not pursue the prosecution of Mickens because she was afraid of him. Eventually, Green's mother persuaded Mickens to return the taken items; however, Mickens still had the duplicate house key.
During most of December, 1997, and January, 1998, Green did not stay in her mobile home because she was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cox v. State, No. S04A2060
...whether the evidence, when viewed most favorably to the jurors' determination, is sufficient to authorize the verdict. Mickens v. State, 277 Ga. 627, 593 S.E.2d 350 (2004); Smith v. State, 277 Ga. 213, 214(1), 586 S.E.2d 639 (2003). When construed most strongly in support of the jury's verd......
-
Cisneros v. State, S16G0443
...the verdict, with deference to the jury's assessment of the weight and credibility of the evidence.(Citations omitted.) Mickens v. State, 277 Ga. 627, 627–628, 593 S.E.2d 350 (2004).OCGA § 16–6–22.1 (b) defines the offense of sexual battery as "intentional[ ] ... physical contact with the i......
-
Davis v. the State., A10A2072.
...to prove lack of authority to enter a dwelling place). 15. OCGA § 16–5–21(a)(2). 16. OCGA § 16–5–20(a). 17. See Mickens v. State, 277 Ga. 627, 629, 593 S.E.2d 350 (2004) (the jury determines the credibility of the witnesses and resolves evidentiary conflicts or inconsistencies). 18. See Cra......
-
Vega v. State, S09A0023.
...to determine the credibility of the witnesses and to resolve any conflicts or inconsistencies in the evidence. [Cits.]" Mickens v. State, 277 Ga. 627-629, 593 S.E.2d 350 (2004). Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to fi......
-
Cox v. State, No. S04A2060
...whether the evidence, when viewed most favorably to the jurors' determination, is sufficient to authorize the verdict. Mickens v. State, 277 Ga. 627, 593 S.E.2d 350 (2004); Smith v. State, 277 Ga. 213, 214(1), 586 S.E.2d 639 (2003). When construed most strongly in support of the jury's verd......
-
Cisneros v. State, S16G0443
...the verdict, with deference to the jury's assessment of the weight and credibility of the evidence.(Citations omitted.) Mickens v. State, 277 Ga. 627, 627–628, 593 S.E.2d 350 (2004).OCGA § 16–6–22.1 (b) defines the offense of sexual battery as "intentional[ ] ... physical contact with the i......
-
Davis v. the State., A10A2072.
...to prove lack of authority to enter a dwelling place). 15. OCGA § 16–5–21(a)(2). 16. OCGA § 16–5–20(a). 17. See Mickens v. State, 277 Ga. 627, 629, 593 S.E.2d 350 (2004) (the jury determines the credibility of the witnesses and resolves evidentiary conflicts or inconsistencies). 18. See Cra......
-
Vega v. State, S09A0023.
...to determine the credibility of the witnesses and to resolve any conflicts or inconsistencies in the evidence. [Cits.]" Mickens v. State, 277 Ga. 627-629, 593 S.E.2d 350 (2004). Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to fi......