Palmore v. State
| Decision Date | 04 April 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. S94A0461,S94A0461 |
| Citation | 264 Ga. 108,441 S.E.2d 405 |
| Parties | PALMORE v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Ernie M. Sheffield, Colquitt and Billy M. Grantham, Donalsonville, for Randy Palmore.
J. Brown Moseley, Dist. Atty., Ron S. Smith, Chief Asst. Dist. Atty., Bainbridge and Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., Atlanta, for the State.
Susan V. Boleyn, Senior Asst. Atty. Gen., Dept. of Law, Atlanta.
Peggy R. Katz, Staff Atty., Atlanta.
Randy Palmore was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison for the shooting death of Sean Sheffield. 1 He appeals, enumerating the sufficiency of the evidence and the denial of his motion for a directed verdict of acquittal.
Evidence was adduced that while Sheffield was talking to friends in the parking lot of a local club, appellant walked up from behind Sheffield, tapped him on the shoulder and called his name. When Sheffield turned, appellant shot him in the chest. Appellant fired twice more as the victim attempted to flee, striking the victim a second time in the chest and also in the hip. Expert testimony established that the victim died as a result of the two chest wounds, one shot having been fired from a distance of less than two inches. Several witnesses to the shooting testified that the victim was unarmed and had no time to make any threatening motions (i.e., reach for a weapon) before appellant shot him. There was evidence that appellant harbored a grudge against the victim because of his involvement in a beating appellant had sustained a week earlier.
Two defense witnesses testified that the victim was armed and had reached for his weapon before appellant fired. Appellant testified that he did not intend to hurt the victim when he first approached and that he fired the shots in self-defense.
As to whether all of the evidence raised any reasonable doubt of the commission of the crime charged or showed appellant acted in self-defense, this is exactly the sort of case where the jury is best empowered to resolve any conflicts in the evidence and determine the credibility of the witnesses and adjudge the facts. Hanson v. State, 258 Ga. 564(1), 372 S.E.2d 436 (1988); Latham v. State, 195 Ga.App. 355(1), 393 S.E.2d 498 (1990). Viewing the evidence in favor of the jury's findings, we find there was sufficient evidence from which a rational trier of fact could find appellant guilty of murder beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Metts v. State
...jury, as it was for the jury to resolve any conflicts in the evidence and determine the credibility of the witnesses. Palmore v. State, 264 Ga. 108, 441 S.E.2d 405 (1994). That the jury acquitted appellant of the aggravated assault charge does not make the evidence of felony murder/possessi......
-
Robertson v. State
...resolve any conflicts in the evidence and determine the credibility of the witnesses and adjudge the facts. [Cits.]" Palmore v. State, 264 Ga. 108, 441 S.E.2d 405 (1994). Contrary to defendant's contention, the evidence is not insufficient because no one identified the "set up" man by name.......
-
Ross v. State
...for the jury to resolve any conflicts in the evidence, determine the credibility of witnesses, and adjudge the facts. Palmore v. State, 264 Ga. 108, 441 S.E.2d 405 (1994). The evidence was sufficient to allow the jury to find Ross guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of Cox's aggravated assault......
-
Cowards v. State
...fact to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Blackwell v. State, 264 Ga. 517, 448 S.E.2d 359 (1994); Palmore v. State, 264 Ga. 108, 441 S.E.2d 405 (1994). The State produced evidence that the victim, the 79-year-old manager of the boardinghouse where appellant resided, bled ......