Patterson v. State, S94A1413
| Court | Supreme Court of Georgia |
| Writing for the Court | Barbara B. Conroy, Asst. Dist. Atty.; CARLEY |
| Citation | 264 Ga. 593,449 S.E.2d 97 |
| Parties | PATTERSON v. The STATE. |
| Docket Number | No. S94A1413,S94A1413 |
| Decision Date | 31 October 1994 |
Page 97
v.
The STATE.
[264 Ga. 594] Melissa M. Nelson, DeKalb County Public Defender, Decatur, for Patterson.
Barbara B. Conroy, Asst. Dist. Atty., J. Tom Morgan, Dist. Atty., Decatur, Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., Susan V. Boleyn, Sr. Asst. Atty. Gen., Michael D. Groves, Asst. Atty. Gen., State Law Dept., Atlanta, Anne G. Maseth, Stone Mountain Judicial Atty., Decatur, for State.
[264 Ga. 593] CARLEY, Justice.
After a jury trial, appellant was found guilty of malice murder and sentenced to life. His motion for new trial was denied and he appeals. 1
1. Appellant enumerates the general grounds. It was undisputed that appellant shot the victim several times, twice in the head. He urges, however, that there was no proof of his intention to kill.
" 'It is for the (trier of fact) to determine whether any killing is intentional and malicious from all the facts and circumstances. [Cit.]' [Cit.]" Latimore v. State, 262 Ga. 448, 450, 421 S.E.2d 281 (1992). The relevant and material facts and circumstances in the instant case include the following:
Page 98
Appellant became angry because the victim had not repaid a small loan. After stating that he would shoot the victim, appellant obtained a gun and, accompanied by several friends, went to confront the victim at his place of work. One of appellant's friends physically assaulted the victim. Although appellant contended that he shot the victim to protect his friend, there was significant evidence to the contrary. After first shooting the victim in the leg, appellant deliberately took aim and fired two shots into the victim's head. Appellant then fled the scene.From this evidence, the jury was authorized to find proof of appellant's guilt of malice murder beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). See also Latimore v. State, supra. Accordingly, appellant's enumeration of the general grounds is without merit.
2. On two occasions, the trial court, in response to the jury's request, recharged on the definitions of murder and voluntary manslaughter. [264 Ga. 594] On yet a third occasion, the jury requested that it be provided with a written recharge on the definition of voluntary manslaughter. In response to this request, the trial court provided a written recharge on the definitions of murder and voluntary manslaughter. Appellant objected to "the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McTaggart v. State, A97A0125
...or recharge on a particular point, the trial court has discretion to also give or not give additional instructions." Patterson v. State, 264 Ga. 593, 594(2), 449 S.E.2d 97 (1994). "In determining whether the recharge contained error, it is fundamental that we must look at not only the recha......
-
Rickman v. State, S03A1134.
...443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). 3. Collins v. State, 276 Ga. 726, 727, 583 S.E.2d 26 (2003). 4. Patterson v. State, 264 Ga. 593, 594, 449 S.E.2d 97 (1994); Miner v. State, 268 Ga. 67-68, 485 S.E.2d 456 (1997); Columbus v. State, 270 Ga. 658, 666, 513 S.E.2d 498 (1999); J......
-
Columbus v. State, S98A1834.
...264 Ga. 31, 32(4), 440 S.E.2d 461 (1994). 23. Leonard v. State, 269 Ga. 867, 870-871(3), 506 S.E.2d 853 (1998). 24. Patterson v. State, 264 Ga. 593, 594(2), 449 S.E.2d 97 25. See Connor v. State, 268 Ga. 656, 657(2), 492 S.E.2d 669 (1997). 26. See Division 2(c), supra. --------...
-
Terry v. State, A96A1496
...objections, the court did not abuse its discretion in not sua sponte charging on the lesser included offense. Patterson v. State, 264 Ga. 593, 594(2), 449 S.E.2d 97 (1994); Miller v. State, 221 Ga.App. 718, 719, 472 S.E.2d 697 5. The fifth enumeration is that the court erred in accepting th......