Powell v. the State.

CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtDOYLE, Judge.
CitationPowell v. the State., 310 Ga.App. 144, 712 S.E.2d 139 (Ga. App. 2011)
Decision Date17 June 2011
Docket NumberNo. A11A0648.,A11A0648.
PartiesPOWELLv.The STATE.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Edgar A. Callaway Jr., Conyers, for appellant.Richard Randolph Read, Dist. Atty., Roberta A. Earnhardt, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.DOYLE, Judge.

[1] Following a jury trial, Sandy Powell was convicted of robbery.1 Powell appeals the denial of his motion for new trial, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. We disagree and affirm.

When reviewing a defendant's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury's verdict, and the defendant no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence. We do not weigh the evidence or determine witness credibility, but only determine if the evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find the defendant guilty of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt.2

So viewed, the evidence shows that on February 19, 2009, Steven Hulsey gave Jessica Davis a ride to Powell's house. Hulsey waited in the car while Davis entered Powell's house. While inside, Davis spoke with Randy Pitts, and the two decided to rob Hulsey. Davis returned to Hulsey's car, and they proceeded to a Ramada Inn. During the drive, Davis repeatedly sent text messages to Pitts's cell phone, discussing the impending robbery.

When they arrived at the motel, Davis urged Hulsey to ask for a room at the back of the complex. Once in the motel room, Hulsey decided to take a shower. Hulsey placed his wallet, which contained approximately $2,300 in cash, in a stack of towels in the bathroom before entering the shower.

Meanwhile, Powell, Pitts, Chris Marable, and Ryan Freeman left Powell's house and drove to the motel. While en route to the motel, there were multiple text messages exchanged with Davis regarding the robbery, which all four occupants of the car discussed. When they arrived at the motel, the four men entered the motel room, while Hulsey was in the shower. Davis did not know where Hulsey's wallet was located, so Pitts directed her to go into the bathroom and ask Hulsey for some money to get a drink. Davis complied and told Pitts that Hulsey's wallet was in the bathroom. Pitts then went into the bathroom, struck Hulsey in the face, took his wallet, and then left the motel in the car with Davis, Powell, Marable, and Freeman. The group returned to Powell's house, where they divided up the money Pitts took from Hulsey. After the robbery and his subsequent arrest, Powell asked Hulsey if he would be willing to drop the charges if his money was returned to him; Hulsey agreed, but his money was never returned.

On appeal, Powell argues that the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that he was a party to Hulsey's robbery rather than merely present at the scene of the crime before the actual robbery. We disagree.

“A person commits the offense of robbery when, with intent to commit theft, he takes property of another from the person or the immediate presence of another ... [b]y use of force.” 3 “Even if a person does not directly commit the crime, a person who intentionally aids or abets in the commission of a crime or intentionally advises, encourages, hires, counsels or procures another to commit the crime may be convicted of the crime as a party to the crime.” 4 Factors to consider when determining whether a person is a party to a crime include “the person's presence, companionship, and...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
60 cases
  • Miller v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • September 9, 2019
    ...and the denial of his motion for new trial.Judgment affirmed. Gobeil and Hodges, JJ., concur.1 See, e.g. , Powell v. State , 310 Ga. App. 144, 144, 712 S.E.2d 139 (2011).2 See English v. State , 301 Ga. App. 842, 842, 689 S.E.2d 130 (2010) (noting that following conviction, an appellant no ......
  • Cotman v. Williamson
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • August 11, 2017
    ...A17A1050 and Case No. A17A1051.Judgment affirmed in both cases . Ray, P. J., and Self, J., concur.1 See, e.g., Powell v. State, 310 Ga. App. 144, 144, 712 S.E.2d 139 (2011).2 Psychometrics is a field of study concerned primarily with developing and evaluating the effectiveness of educationa......
  • Anderson v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • June 11, 2019
    ...affirmed in part; vacated in part; and remanded for resentencing. Gobeil and Hodges, JJ., concur.1 See, e.g. , Powell v. State , 310 Ga. App. 144, 144, 712 S.E.2d 139 (2011).2 See English v. State , 301 Ga. App. 842, 842, 689 S.E.2d 130 (2010) (noting that following trial and conviction, th......
  • Hartzler v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • June 30, 2015
    ...reasons, we affirm Hartzler's convictions.Judgment affirmed.ELLINGTON, P.J., and McFADDEN, J., concur.1 See, e.g., Powell v. State, 310 Ga.App. 144, 144, 712 S.E.2d 139 (2011).2 Sowell v. State, 327 Ga.App. 532, 534, 759 S.E.2d 602 (2014).3 Lee v. State, 317 Ga.App. 507, 508, 731 S.E.2d 768......
  • Get Started for Free