Norton v. State, A90A2310
| Decision Date | 11 March 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. A90A2310,A90A2310 |
| Citation | 199 Ga.App. 27,403 S.E.2d 884 |
| Parties | NORTON v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Howard & Delaney, Stephen A. Delaney, Marietta, for appellant.
Garry T. Moss, Dist. Atty., Charles D. Gafnea, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Appellant was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault and appeals from the denial of his motion for new trial. On appeal he contends that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence two alleged similar transactions.
The evidence showed that on January 24, 1987, the victim, a black American, participated in the "Brotherhood March" through the City of Cumming, Georgia, to the Forsyth County Courthouse. After listening to the speakers at the courthouse, the victim and several other participants in the march returned to their cars, encountering along the way persons who called them names and threw rocks, bricks and other objects at them. As the victim crossed the street in front of an establishment in which appellant had earlier been drinking, the victim was struck in the head with an unknown object which fractured his skull. It was later determined that the object which hit the victim was a piece of brick; however, the victim did not see who threw the brick at him.
The week following the brotherhood march, agent Douglas Carter was assigned to investigate the assault on the victim. Agent Carter, through contacts with local law enforcement agencies, followed various leads and interviewed numerous witnesses which eventually led to appellant's arrest. Agent Carter took written statements from many persons who stated that appellant told them that on the day of the brotherhood march he hit a black person in the head with a rock or brick. The statements indicated that appellant repeatedly referred to black people as "niggers." At trial, when some of those same individuals testified that the statements they gave to Agent Carter were not true, their statements were read into evidence for purposes of impeachment. The State also presented several witnesses who testified that sometime after the march, appellant told them that he had been in Forsyth County on the day of the march and had hit a black person in the head with a rock. Also, an officer with the City of Cumming police department testified that he arrived at the scene after the victim had been hit and that a little girl pointed at appellant as someone who had been throwing rocks.
The State introduced evidence of three similar transactions, and the admission of two of those form the basis for this appeal. The transcript from the hearing to determine the admissibility of the similar transactions reveals that in December 1987, appellant, while driving a tractor-trailer truck on an interstate highway in Maryland, pulled alongside Edward Reed, a black man, in an effort to prevent Reed from accelerating. The two began talking via CB radio, and appellant repeatedly...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bohannon v. State
...of similar violent or hostile acts against others likewise may be admitted to show bent of mind or course of conduct. Norton v. State, 199 Ga.App. 27, 403 S.E.2d 884 (1991); Jordan v. State, 192 Ga.App. 69, 70(2), 383 S.E.2d 631 (1989). At trial, appellant's defense consisted primarily of s......
-
Sloan v. State, A94A1846
...of similar violent or hostile acts against others likewise may be admitted to show bent of mind or course of conduct. Norton v. State, 199 Ga.App. 27 (403 SE2d 884) (1991); Jordan v. State, 192 Ga.App. 69, 70(2) (383 SE2d 631) (1989)." Bohannon v. State, 208 Ga.App. 576, 578(2), 580(2)(b), ......
-
Willis v. State
...See Jordan v. State, 192 Ga.App. 69, 70, 383 S.E.2d 631; see also Harris v. State, 210 Ga.App. 366, 436 S.E.2d 231; Norton v. State, 199 Ga.App. 27, 403 S.E.2d 884. When sufficient basis exists to admit the evidence, dissimilarities such as the type of weapon used or the precise igniting ac......
-
Ware v. State
...205 Ga.App. 133, 134(2), 421 S.E.2d 547 (1992); Carter v. State, 199 Ga.App. 843, 844(2), 406 S.E.2d 238 (1991); Norton v. State, 199 Ga.App. 27, 28, 403 S.E.2d 884 (1991). The testimony at issue was not sufficiently cumulative or prejudicial to warrant reversal. Because Ware's additional a......