Wilson v. State
Decision Date | 09 July 1998 |
Docket Number | No. A98A0088.,A98A0088. |
Citation | 503 S.E.2d 924,233 Ga. App. 327 |
Parties | WILSON v. The STATE. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Robert P. Wilson, Decatur, for appellant.
June D. Green, Solicitor, Wanda L. Dallas, Assistant Solicitor, for appellee.
Johnny W. Wilson was charged with the failure to stop at the scene of an accident pursuant to OCGA § 40-6-270. After a mistrial was declared in the proceedings below, Wilson filed this appeal. For the reasons set forth below, we reverse.
1. Wilson contends that the trial court erred by denying his motion for directed verdict of acquittal at the close of the State's case against him. (Citations, punctuation and emphasis omitted.) Noble v. State, 225 Ga.App. 470, 484 S.E.2d 78 (1997). See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). (Punctuation omitted.) Tyler v. State, 198 Ga.App. 685, 687-688(2), 402 S.E.2d 780 (1991).
Based on the evidence in this case, the trial court properly denied Wilson's motion for a directed verdict. The record shows that, on the night of February 14, 1995, the Honda being driven by Kimberly Mendez was struck head on by a car which crossed over the centerline of the road. Mrs. Mendez' husband, Robert Mendez, was riding in the passenger's seat. Mrs. Mendez described the car which hit her as a light blue LTD or Crown Victoria. Mr. Mendez described the car as a light blue, late 1980s model Ford which was either a Crown Victoria or LTD.
After the collision, the Mendezes pulled into a driveway, and the car which struck them pulled into an adjacent driveway. After his car came to a stop, Mr. Mendez jumped out to get a better look at the other car. While standing six or seven feet away, Mr. Mendez watched the car which struck his car being reversed out of the driveway in which it had been driven. Mr. Mendez stated that he got a good look at the driver of the car whom he later identified as Wilson. Although he was standing toward the rear of the car, Mr. Mendez testified that he nonetheless got a good look at Wilson's face because he had turned his face to the rear of the car to see where he was backing up.
Mr. Mendez also read the tag number of the car, and, although he had no way to write it down, he remembered that "it was something to the effect of BTJ 136 or 186," which he told the police officer at the scene of the accident. Wilson, an employee of the family-owned business of Wilson Welding Service, Inc., is the registered owner of a light blue 1987 Ford Crown Victoria with the tag number BJT 186. Although Wilson argues that he could not have been the hit-and-run driver because there was no damage to his car, his own expert testified that it was possible that a Ford Crown Victoria could be involved in an accident with a Honda without being damaged. Furthermore, Officer Britman of the City of Atlanta Police Department testified that he inspected Wilson's car and that he believed the car had been damaged and repaired. Under the standard of Jackson v. Virginia, supra, any rational trier of fact could have found Wilson guilty of the crime of hit and run beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, Wilson's motion for a directed verdict of acquittal was properly denied.
2. Wilson also contends that the trial court erred by denying his motion for directed verdict of acquittal notwithstanding the mistrial. However, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial- Williams v. The State
-
State v. Thomas
...The only Georgia opinion upon which the trial court relied is a physical precedent from the Court of Appeals. Wilson v. State, 233 Ga.App. 327, 329(3), 503 S.E.2d 924 (1998). The holding in that case is clearly distinguishable, because it was based on conduct of the prosecutor which indispu......
-
Bright v. State, No. A99A0666
...v. State, 185 Ga.App. 545, 365 S.E.2d 137 (1988). Viewed in the light most favorable to the jury's verdict, Wilson v. State, 233 Ga.App. 327, 328(1), 503 S.E.2d 924 (1998), the evidence was that Bright was the first cousin of Philip Adams who had brought Bright to live with him, his wife an......
-
Mathis v. State, No. A05A1271.
...to the most basic rules of prosecutorial procedure" as to give rise to a presumption of unlawful intent. See Wilson v. State, 233 Ga.App. 327, 329-330(3), 503 S.E.2d 924 (1998).4 "The bar double jeopardy is such an extreme sanction against the interest of the state in prosecuting one who ha......
-
Criminal Law - Franklin J. Hogue and Laura D. Hogue
...at 759. 7. 233 Ga. App. at 467, 504 S.E.2d at 240. 8. Jones v. Wharton, 253 Ga. 82, 83, 316 S.E.2d 749, 751 (1984). 9. Wilson v. State, 233 Ga. App. 327, 329, 503 S.E.2d 924, 926 (1998) (quoting Williams v. State, 258 Ga. 305, 312, 369 S.E.2d 232, 237 (1988)). 10. 233 Ga. App. 327, 503 S.E.......