Thompson v. The State

Decision Date29 March 2010
Docket NumberNo. S10A0607.,S10A0607.
Citation286 Ga. 891,692 S.E.2d 384
PartiesTHOMPSONv.The STATE.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

286 Ga. 891
692 S.E.2d 384

THOMPSON
v.
The STATE.

No. S10A0607.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

March 29, 2010.


692 S.E.2d 384
Scott A. Drake, Lawrenceville, for appellant.

Daniel J. Porter, District Attorney, David Keith Keeton, Assistant District Attorney,
692 S.E.2d 385
Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, Benjamin H. Pierman, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

THOMPSON, Justice.

Defendant Kevin Lamar Thompson was convicted of murder, aggravated assault and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in connection with the death of Charles Leonard.1 Following the denial of his motion for new trial, defendant appeals. We find no reversible error and affirm.

On the day in question, defendant, and others, were helping a friend, co-defendant Demars “Lucky” Crowell,2 move out of his apartment. Defendant was seen carrying a pistol when he arrived at the apartment complex.

Crowell and the victim had quarreled the previous day. Defendant told Crowell that the victim was at the complex and that he (defendant) wanted to confront him. Crowell retrieved a baseball bat and approached defendant and the victim, who were speaking to one another. Crowell swung the baseball bat at the victim and the two of them struggled to control the bat. As he struggled, Crowell heard two shots and saw defendant walk away with a pistol in his hand.

Before he died, the victim called to his mother and asked her to call 911. The victim died in his mother's arms, saying that “Lucky” shot him. Bullets matching the type which struck the victim were found in defendant's apartment. No such bullets were found in Crowell's possession. Defendant admitted shooting the victim in conversations with fellow inmates.

1. The evidence was sufficient to enable any rational trier of fact to find defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crimes for which he was convicted. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). Contrary to defendant's assertion, it was not incumbent upon the State to prove defendant's motive in committing any of the crimes. See Darling v. State, 248 Ga. 485, 487(4), 284 S.E.2d 260 (1981). The fact that much of the testimony against defendant was given by convicted felons is of no consequence. It is the jury, not this Court, which sifts the evidence and determines its credibility. Young v. State, 255 Ga. 143, 144(1), 335 S.E.2d 864 (1985).

2. Pointing out that he was entitled to two hours for closing argument, see Monroe v....

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • State v. Kelly
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • November 7, 2011
    ... ... State, 287 Ga. 187(4), 695 S.E.2d 210 (2010) (same); Hicks v. State, 287 Ga. 260(4), 695 S.E.2d 195 (2010) (same), with Madrigal v. State, 287 Ga. 121(3), 694 S.E.2d 652 (2010) (finding waiver of unpreserved error without addressing plain error); Thompson v. State, 286 Ga. 889(3), 692 S.E.2d 379 (2010) (same); Hatcher v. State, 286 Ga. 491(4), 690 S.E.2d 174 (2010) (same); Metz v. State, 284 Ga. 614(5), 669 S.E.2d 121 (2008) (same). We now hold that, under OCGA 17858(b), appellate review for plain error is required whenever an appealing party ... ...
  • Romer v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • July 1, 2013
    ...for killing the victim to sustain a murder conviction, since motive is not an essential element of the crime. See Thompson v. State, 286 Ga. 891, 892, 692 S.E.2d 384 (2010); Darling v. State, 248 Ga. 485, 487, 284 S.E.2d 260 (1981). When viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, th......
  • Stovall v. The State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • June 28, 2010
    ...we cannot say that appellant's right to make a two-hour closing was abridged by the trial court's misstatement. See Thompson v. State, 286 Ga. 891, 692 S.E.2d 384 (2010). In light of the timing and the content of defense counsel's announced plans, appellant's assertion on appeal that trial ......
  • Ferrell v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • October 18, 2011
    ...690 S.E.2d 435 (2010). 27. One cannot invite error and then seek to have a conviction reversed on that basis. Thompson v. State, 286 Ga. 891, 892(2), 692 S.E.2d 384 (2010). 28. See Brogdon v. State, 270 Ga.App. 568, 569(2), 607 S.E.2d 199 (2004) (“The instructions in a criminal trial should......
  • 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