Prayor v. State

Decision Date26 July 1994
Docket NumberNo. A94A1774,A94A1774
Citation214 Ga.App. 132,447 S.E.2d 155
PartiesPRAYOR v. The STATE.
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

Douglas R.X. Padgett, Atlanta, for appellant.

J. Tom Morgan, Dist. Atty., Richard S. Moultrie, Jr., Gregory J. Lohmeier, Asst. Dist. Attys., for appellee.

POPE, Chief Judge.

Defendant Charles Wade Prayor filed this appeal from the denial of his motion for supersedeas bond, OCGA § 17-6-1, following his conviction for aggravated assault.

The record shows that defendant, watching through a window in his house, saw a 15-year-old boy break into his truck. He went outside and chased away the teenager before reentering his house to call 911. After hanging up the phone, defendant retrieved his .357 magnum, got into his car, and tracked down the teenager at a nearby school. The teenager did not stop at defendant's command, and defendant fired what he termed a warning shot which struck the teen in the back or side, paralyzing him.

In his sole enumeration of error, defendant contends that the trial court erred by denying his motion for a supersedeas bond. We find no merit to this contention. The trial court should not grant bond unless defendant meets his burden of presenting sufficient evidence to convince the trial court that (1) there is no substantial risk the applicant will flee, (2) he is unlikely to commit a serious crime, (3) he will not intimidate witnesses or otherwise interfere with the administration of justice, and (4) his appeal is not frivolous or taken for delay. Birge v. State, 238 Ga. 88, 90, 230 S.E.2d 895 (1976), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 945, 98 S.Ct. 2847, 56 L.Ed.2d 786 (1978). The trial court complied with the procedure set forth in Birge and did not abuse its discretion in denying the appeal bond based on evidence that defendant showed a violent character which, coupled with his violent temper, lack of remorse, and belief that he had committed no wrong in shooting a fleeing teenager who appeared to be stealing his truck, indicated that defendant would be a danger to others. See Bell v. State, 204 Ga.App. 528, 530(2), 419 S.E.2d 729 (1992).

The trial court also found that defendant failed to prove his appeal was not frivolous or taken for purposes of delay. Defendant based his appeal on Johnson v. Jackson, 140 Ga.App. 252, 230 S.E.2d 756 (1976), which he misinterprets as authorizing a person to use violent force to stop a fleeing suspect. As the trial court stated, the law in Georgia forbids a person from using...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • McPetrie v. State, No. A03A1238
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 5 Septiembre 2003
    ...252, 257(3), 230 S.E.2d 756 (1976) (construing Code 1933, § 27-211, predecessor statute to OCGA § 17-4-60). 3. See Prayor v. State, 214 Ga.App. 132, 133, 447 S.E.2d 155 (1994) (private citizen not authorized to use violent force to stop a fleeing suspect). 4. See Mann v. State, 254 Ga.App. ......
  • Prayor v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 17 Marzo 1995
    ...is limited to self-defense or to a situation in which it is necessary to prevent a forcible felony." Id. See also Prayor v. State, 214 Ga.App. 132, 133, 447 S.E.2d 155 (1994). This enumeration is thus without 2. Contrary to defendant's second enumeration of error, under the evidence adduced......
  • Williams v. State, A97A1796
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 27 Agosto 1997
    ...or otherwise interfere with the administration of justice, and (4) his appeal is not frivolous or taken for delay." Prayor v. State, 214 Ga.App. 132, 447 S.E.2d 155; Birge, supra [228 Ga.App. 291] at 90, 230 S.E.2d 895. Thus, unless the trial court determines in the exercise of its sound di......
  • Wade v. State, A95A1037
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 18 Agosto 1995
    ...the present practice is that a direct appeal from an order denying appeal bond should be considered on the merits. See Prayor v. State, 214 Ga.App. 132, 447 S.E.2d 155. 2. In his sole enumeration of error, defendant contends the trial court abused its discretion in denying an appeal bond, a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT