Scott v. State, 64184
| Decision Date | 11 June 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 64184,64184 |
| Parties | SCOTT v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Lawrence Lee Washburn, III, Atlanta, for appellant.
Lewis R. Slaton, H. Allen Moye, Paul L. Howard, Jr., Asst. Dist. Attys., Atlanta, for appellee.
In this appeal from his conviction for burglary, the defendant contends that he was prejudiced by the introduction of evidence of two prior offenses he had committed. Held :
1. As a general rule, evidence of other criminal acts committed by the accused is inadmissible, as it tends to place his character in issue. See generally Code § 38-202; Bacon v. State, 209 Ga. 261, 71 S.E.2d 615 (1952). However, such evidence is admissible where relevant for the purpose of showing identity, motive, plan, scheme, bent of mind, and course of conduct, provided that the accused is identified as the perpetrator and that the other crimes are similar or logically connected to the crime for which he is being tried, so that proof of one tends to prove the other. State v. Johnson, 246 Ga. 654, 272 S.E.2d 321 (1980).
The burglary for which the defendant was being tried took place at an auto parts store near downtown Atlanta, on March 21, 1981. Police arrived at the scene at about 2:00 a. m. in response to a silent burglar alarm, at which time the arresting officer observed an opening in a rear window which had previously been covered with wire mesh held in place by wood two-by-fours. The defendant was arrested as he crawled out of this opening, headfirst. He was not in possession of any stolen property.
The arresting officer testified that he had arrested the defendant for burglary on two previous occasions, most recently at a supermarket on November 2, 1980. As in the case under consideration now, police were summoned to the scene by a silent burglar alarm, whereupon they discovered that an opening had been made in a rear window by pulling away some wire screen. As they watched, the defendant proceeded to dump a cartful of groceries through this hole and then began to crawl out headfirst. He later pled guilty to burglary in connection with this offense.
The arrest for the other prior offense took place during the early morning hours of July 27, 1980. The officer testified that he heard a burglar alarm as he was patroling past a child care center and, upon investigation, found that a heavy wooden door leading into the building had been forced open. Finding no one inside, he secured the door and left. However, he returned to the scene at about 5:30 or 5:45 a. m., at which time he observed the defendant seated next to the door holding a tape recorder which was shown to have been taken from inside the building. The defendant was indicted for both burglary and attempted burglary following this arrest. He pled guilty to the charge of criminal attempt, and the burglary charge was placed upon the deaddocket. There was evidence that all three buildings which the defendant was arrested for entering (the auto parts store, the supermarket, and the child care center) were located in the same section of the city, only a few minutes by foot from his home.
There is no question that the modus operandi of the supermarket burglary was similar to that of the burglary for which the defendant was on trial. In both cases, he entered through a rear window by removing a wire screen, in both cases he tripped a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McNeese v. State
...was on probation at one time contributed to the verdict. See generally Johnson v. State, 238 Ga. 59, 230 S.E.2d 869; Scott v. State, 162 Ga.App. 541, 542(1), 292 S.E.2d 125. 5. The defendant presented evidence to show that he had gonorrhea on a certain date. In rebuttal the state called the......
-
Evans v. State
...v. State, 187 Ga.App. 108, 369 S.E.2d 356 (1988); Nelson v. State, 181 Ga.App. 481(2), 352 S.E.2d 804 (1987); Scott v. State, 162 Ga.App. 541(1), 292 S.E.2d 125 (1982). 5. We reject any contention by appellant Stevie Evans that, because there was no evidence that he had been a party to the ......
-
Willis v. State
...was overwhelming, and thus we find it highly probable that the evidence did not contribute to the verdict. See Scott v. State, 162 Ga.App. 541-542(1), 292 S.E.2d 125 (1982). 2. Appellant also enumerates as error the trial court's failure to give his requested charge on OCGA § 16-4-5, which ......
-
Coggins v. State, 66731
...[and] it is perfectly proper to introduce a certified copy of the indictment and the plea or verdict of guilty." Scott v. State, 162 Ga.App. 541(2), 292 S.E.2d 125 (1982). In the case before us, the offense charged involved an assault upon a corrections officer with intent to cause serious ......