Motes v. State, 63066
| Decision Date | 05 February 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 63066,63066 |
| Citation | 161 Ga.App. 173,288 S.E.2d 256 |
| Parties | MOTES v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Daniel J. Sammons, Gainesville, for appellant.
Jeff C. Wayne, Dist. Atty., Partick F. McMahon, Bruce L. Udolf, Asst. Dist. Attys., for appellee.
1. The appellant and two other inmates of a correction facility were indicted for sexual assaults allegedly committed on the inmate victim Tierney. Motes' trial resulted in acquittal on one count and conviction on two counts of aggravated sodomy. The victim's testimony as to the two occurrences of which the defendant was convicted was circumstantial and was supported by that of another prisoner in the "bull pen." The latter witness, who was also abused, reported the facts to a peace officer who had the named victim examined by a doctor. Scratches and other physical evidence supported the testimony that assaults had occurred. The evidence was ample to convince a rational trier of fact that the appellant, as well as his two coindictees, was guilty of the offenses. The motion to direct a verdict of acquittal was properly overruled.
2. The trial court instructed the jury in substance in line with the holding in Sandstrom v. Montana, 442 U.S. 510, 99 S.Ct. 2450, 61 L.Ed.2d 39 (1979) that a person will not be presumed to act with criminal intent, although a jury may after examination of all the circumstances of the case, find that such intent existed. He also gave them proper instructions on the presumption of innocence, on the state's burden of proving each element of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt, that a crime involves a joint operation of act and intent or criminal negligence, that the acts of a person of sound mind are presumed to be the product of his will but this may be rebutted, etc. He then correctly stated that intent may be inferred from proven circumstances, or by acts and conduct, or presumed when it is the natural and necessary consequence of the act. Taken as a whole the instructions were full and fair. They did not suffer from the vice pointed out in Sandstrom that the charge on presumption of intent from a voluntary act might be understood by the jury to be a conclusive presumption, and it was unnecessary to repeat without request the phrase underlined above. Cf. Moses v. State, 245 Ga. 180, 263 S.E.2d 916 (1980).
3. The remaining enumeration of error complains that the court should have instructed the jury without request that if they found the victim Tierney had in fact consented to the acts...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Parker v. State
...general grounds. Contrary to appellant's contentions, corroboration of his daughter's testimony was not required. Motes v. State, --- Ga.App. ---(3), 288 S.E.2d 256 (1982); Baker v. State, 245 Ga. 657(5), 266 S.E.2d 477 (1980). After a review of the entire record, we find that a rational tr......
-
Scales v. State
...for corroboration in a conviction for the offense of sodomy. Clardy v. State, 87 Ga.App. 633, 639 (6), 75 S.E.2d 208; Motes v. State, 161 Ga.App. 173 (3), 288 S.E.2d 256; Massey v. State, 165 Ga.App. 67, 299 S.E.2d 3. Defendant's next door neighbor apparently departed for parts unknown afte......
-
Pendergrass v. State
...it has been clearly abused. [Cit.]" Babb v. State, 157 Ga.App. 757(3), 278 S.E.2d 495, overruled on other grounds in Motes v. State, 161 Ga.App. 173, 288 S.E.2d 256. As was the case in Babb, we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing the continuance. Appellant, how......
-
Cuzzort v. State, 68555
...with which he was charged. There is no longer any requirement that the victim's testimony be corroborated. See Motes v. State, 161 Ga.App. 173(3), 288 S.E.2d 256 (1982). Appellant's contention that the expert medical evidence contradicted the victim's testimony is refuted by the transcript.......