Smith v. State

Decision Date28 June 2000
Docket NumberNo. A00A0586.,A00A0586.
Citation536 S.E.2d 561,244 Ga. App. 667
PartiesSMITH v. The STATE.
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Steven E. Phillips, Atlanta, for appellant.

Paul L. Howard, Jr., District Attorney, Christopher M. Quinn, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

POPE, Presiding Judge.

Clarence E. Smith was charged with armed robbery, terroristic threats, and kidnapping. He was acquitted of armed robbery, terroristic threats, and kidnapping but convicted of the lesser offense of robbery and sentenced to serve 12 years. On the night of May 2, 1996, Smith and Norris Galbert drank a few beers together at Galbert's home. Smith was a neighbor and had been to Galbert's house at least once before. Smith testified that they ran out of beer and that Galbert gave him $40 to go to the store and buy more. Smith also testified he took $10 from Galbert's jewelry box to buy himself a different type of beer. Galbert testified to a different version of events. Galbert testified that she declined Smith's request to buy more beer, and he then asked to use her restroom. Galbert testified that Smith returned from the restroom with his hand in his pocket, told her he had a gun, and forced her into her bedroom where he took approximately $100 from her wallet and a ring and watch off her dresser. In addition, Galbert testified that Smith threatened to kill her if she did not give him $500.

1. Smith first enumerates as error the failure of the trial court to give his requested charge on the offense of theft by taking as a lesser included offense of armed robbery. We agree that the requested charge should have been given and reverse Smith's conviction.

The complete rule with regard to giving a defendant's requested charge on a lesser included offense is: where the state's evidence establishes all of the elements of an offense and there is no evidence raising the lesser offense, there is no error in failing to give a charge on the lesser offense. [But] [w]here a case contains some evidence, no matter how slight, that shows that the defendant committed a lesser offense, then the court should charge the jury on that offense.

(Citations omitted; emphasis in original.) Edwards v. State, 264 Ga. 131, 133, 442 S.E.2d 444 (1994).

In this case, Smith and Galbert gave differing accounts of the circumstances surrounding the theft of the money, and there were no other witnesses to the event. Smith claims that Galbert gave him two $20 bills from her purse and that while he was leaving, he took a $10 bill from her jewelry box. Galbert testified Smith took approximately $100 and some jewelry after telling her he had a gun and threatening to kill her. Although the State argues that Galbert saw Smith take the money, the transcript shows that Galbert was not aware that Smith took the $10 from her dresser. Likewise, the record does not support the State's argument that Smith claimed at trial that he had permission to take the $10. Smith testified that he saw the $10 sticking out from under Galbert's jewelry box and that he grabbed it on his way out the door. Additionally, one of the investigating officers testified at trial that Smith told him the victim gave him $40 and he took $10 for himself. Consequently, the trial court erred by refusing to give the requested charge under the facts of this case. Pearson v. State, 216 Ga.App. 333, 334, 454 S.E.2d 205 (1995) (defense counsel was deemed ineffective for failure to request charge on lesser included offense of theft by taking in prosecution for armed robbery where defendant admitted theft and sole defense was that he did not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Seabolt v. Norris
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • March 7, 2016
    ...offense of malice murder was prejudicial, as the evidence presented at trial was not overwhelming. See, e.g., Smith v. State, 244 Ga.App. 667(1), 536 S.E.2d 561 (2000) (trial court committed reversible error by failing to charge on lesser included offense where evidence supported charge and......
  • Wright v. State, A12A2146.
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • February 11, 2013
    ...closing argument when made). 29.Edwards v. State, 264 Ga. 131, 133, 442 S.E.2d 444 (1994) (citation and emphasis omitted). 30.244 Ga.App. 667, 536 S.E.2d 561 (2000). 31.Id. at 668(1), 536 S.E.2d 561. 32.Id. 33.Id. 34.252 Ga.App. 552, 556 S.E.2d 826 (2001). 35.Id. 36.Id. at 553, 556 S.E.2d 8......
  • Bickford v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • May 15, 2018
    ...("When they finally arrived at Darland's house, she allowed Dunn to go inside, ostensibly to use her restroom."). Smith v. State, 536 S.E.2d 561, 562 (Ga. App. 2000) ("[The defendant] then asked to use her restroom . . . returned from the restroom with his hand in his pocket, told her he ha......
  • Allstate Ins. Co. v. Baldwin
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • June 28, 2000
    ... ... BALDWIN et al ... No. A00A0031 ... Court of Appeals of Georgia ... June 28, 2000 ...         Young, Thagard, Hoffman, Scott & Smith, Daniel C. Hoffman, Elizabeth C. Cleveland, Valdosta, for appellant ...         536 S.E.2d 559 Copeland & Haugabrook, Roy W. Copeland, Karla ... At sometime during 1994, Wisenbaker's insurance carrier, State Casualty Insurance Company, became insolvent. Baldwin's uninsured motorist insurance carrier, Allstate, had not been named or served in the suit. The ... ...
  • 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