Smith v. State, No. A06A0180.
| Decision Date | 05 May 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. A06A0180. |
| Citation | 630 S.E.2d 833,279 Ga. App. 211 |
| Parties | SMITH v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
John T. Strauss, Teresa L. Doepke, Monroe, for appellant.
W. Kendall Wynne, Jr., District Attorney, David E. Boyle, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.
Following a jury trial, Kenny Smith was convicted of two counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and one count of possession of a deadly weapon during the commission of a felony. On appeal, Smith challenges the sufficiency of the State's evidence as to the aggravated assault convictions and alleges that the trial court erred in admitting photographs of the victim and Smith's firearm. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
On appeal from a criminal conviction, the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict. Anthony v. State, 276 Ga.App. 107(1), 622 S.E.2d 450 (2005). We neither assess the credibility of the witnesses nor weigh the evidence, but instead determine only whether a rational trier of fact could have found each of the elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979).
So viewed, the evidence adduced at trial showed that Smith and the victim Phillip Cross were longtime friends. On the evening of November 29, 2001, Smith and Cross were hanging out with several other men at a vacant lot that was frequently used by the group to socialize. Smith became angry at Cross for reasons apparently related to a fishing trip that the two had embarked upon the previous evening, and Smith began to insult and harass Cross. When Cross attempted to leave the lot, Smith followed him to his car and threatened him. Cross then shoved Smith to the ground and a minor scuffle ensued. Smith ultimately got into his truck and left.
A short time later, Smith returned to the lot brandishing a gun. He immediately got out of his vehicle and fired his gun into the air. Still carrying his weapon, Smith approached the other men at the lot and demanded to know where Cross had gone. Cross, who had been sitting in his truck preparing to leave, was afraid that Smith was going to hurt someone so he called out to Smith, "Here I am." Smith ran directly toward Cross and from a distance of approximately two or three feet, shot several rounds into the truck. One bullet struck Cross in the head and another struck him in the arm. Cross managed to exit his vehicle and hit Smith several times before leaving the scene.
1. Smith contends that there was insufficient evidence of his intent on both counts of aggravated assault. We disagree. Count 1 of the indictment charged Smith with aggravated assault for attempting to commit a violent injury to Cross by shooting him with a deadly weapon, in violation of OCGA § 16-5-21(a)(2). Count 2 of the indictment alleged that Smith committed aggravated assault with a deadly weapon by committing an act which placed Cross in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury by shooting him, in violation of OCGA § 16-5-21(a)(2).
The jury was authorized to infer that Smith intended to commit a violent injury upon Cross in view of the evidence showing that when Smith returned to the scene, he demanded to know Cross's location, and then walked directly up to Cross and shot him. Smiley v. State, 263 Ga. 716, 717(2), 438 S.E.2d 75 (1994). See also Cornelius v. State, 273 Ga.App. 806, 807-808(1), 616 S.E.2d 148 (2005). This same evidence was also sufficient to show that Smith intended to commit an act that placed Cross in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury. Not surprisingly, Cross testified that he was "terrified" when Smith approached him and began firing his weapon. Id.; Head v. State, 233 Ga.App. 655, 656(1), 504 S.E.2d 499 (1998). Construing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, any rational trier of fact could have found Smith guilty of aggravated assault as alleged in both counts of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Collins v. State
...and remand this case with instruction that the trial court amend the judgment to reflect the merger. See Smith v. State, 279 Ga.App. 211, 212-213(1), 630 S.E.2d 833 (2006); Doublette v. State, 278 Ga.App. 746, 750(2), 629 S.E.2d 602 2. In several enumerations of error, Collins contends that......
-
Walker v. State
...failure to produce the police duty logs caused any harm. Judgment affirmed.ADAMS and BLACKWELL, JJ., concur. 1. See Smith v. State, 279 Ga.App. 211, 630 S.E.2d 833 (2006). 2. A different superior court judge presided over the perjury trial. 3. Walker did not enumerate as error on appeal or ......
-
Philpot v. the State.
...we affirm. “On appeal from a criminal conviction, the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict.” Smith v. State, 279 Ga.App. 211, 630 S.E.2d 833 (2006). So viewed, the evidence showed that on the evening of October 30, 2008, the female victim, along with her sister and ......
-
Lacey v. the State.
...directly relevant and admissible to prove the charge against Lacey of committing aggravated assault on Mayhew. See Smith v. State, 279 Ga.App. 211(2), 630 S.E.2d 833 (2006); Brown v. State, 258 Ga.App. 78(3), 573 S.E.2d 110 (2002). As the disputed remarks and evidence were not improper, tri......