From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Allen v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Mar 12, 1992
416 S.E.2d 869 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992)

Opinion

A92A0714.

DECIDED MARCH 12, 1992.

Aggravated assault, etc. Bibb Superior Court. Before Judge Morgan.

Sinnreich Francisco, John R. Francisco, for appellant.

Willis B. Sparks III, District Attorney, Charles H. Weston, Thomas J. Matthews, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellee.


Defendant Allen was charged by indictment with two counts of rape, single counts of aggravated sodomy and aggravated assault, and two counts of false imprisonment. A jury acquitted defendant of the rape and aggravated sodomy charges, but convicted him of the aggravated assault and false imprisonment charges. Defendant appeals his conviction of aggravated assault and two counts of false imprisonment. Held:

1. Defendant's first enumeration of error contends that the verdicts are inconsistent. While defendant acknowledges the abolishment of the inconsistent verdict rule in Milam v. State, 255 Ga. 560, 562 (2) ( 341 S.E.2d 216), and that the acquittal on the rape and aggravated sodomy charges do not preclude the findings of fact necessary for the convictions for aggravated assault and false imprisonment under a res judicata theory, he contends that the convictions should be overturned because they are repugnant to, or inconsistent with the acquittals. This, of course, is entirely a matter of semantics as the argument which defendant makes is, in essence, indistinguishable from the inconsistent verdict rule. In any event, application of the principle that a jury is entitled to believe a part of the testimony of a witness and disbelieve other parts is sufficient to sustain a jury's verdict. See Hines v. State, 254 Ga. 386, 387 ( 329 S.E.2d 479). This enumeration of error is without merit.

2. Defendant also contends that there was a fatal variance between proof and indictment with respect to the instrumentality used to accomplish the aggravated assault. However, no issue as to an alleged variance was raised before the trial court. Thus, this issue is not preserved for appellate review. Walker v. State, 113 Ga. App. 526, 527 (1) ( 149 S.E.2d 153). See also Lewis v. State, 198 Ga. App. 808, 809 (2) ( 403 S.E.2d 233); Truelove v. State, 198 Ga. App. 14 (2) ( 400 S.E.2d 396).

Insofar as this enumeration of error may raise an issue as to the sufficiency of the evidence to authorize defendant's conviction of aggravated assault, it is meritless. A rational trier of fact could reasonably have found from the evidence adduced at trial proof of defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt of aggravated assault. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560).

Judgment affirmed. Sognier, C. J., and Cooper, J., concur.

DECIDED MARCH 12, 1992.


Summaries of

Allen v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Mar 12, 1992
416 S.E.2d 869 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992)
Case details for

Allen v. State

Case Details

Full title:ALLEN v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Mar 12, 1992

Citations

416 S.E.2d 869 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992)
416 S.E.2d 869

Citing Cases

Walker v. State

In addition, the acquittals on the statutory rape and enticing a child for indecent purposes charges do not…

Overstreet v. State

Drake v. State, 238 Ga. App. 584, 586 (1) ( 519 S.E.2d 692) (1999). Id.; see also Allen v. State, 203 Ga.…