Austin v. State

4 Citing cases

  1. Kaufman v. State

    810 S.E.2d 585 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018)   Cited 2 times
    Noting that "a special demurrer merely objects to the form of an indictment and seeks more information or greater specificity about the offense charged" (citation and punctuation omitted)

    "Austin v. State , 335 Ga.App. 521, 524 (1), 782 S.E.2d 308 (2016) (citation and punctuation omitted). Id. (punctuation omitted).

  2. Stephenson v. State

    352 Ga. App. 267 (Ga. Ct. App. 2019)

    (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Marlow v. State , 339 Ga. App. 790, 792-793 (1), 792 S.E.2d 712 (2016) (giving a false statement); see also Austin v. State , 335 Ga. App. 521, 782 S.E.2d 308 (2016) (stalking). Viewed in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, the evidence shows that on December 21, 2013, Stephenson spent less than ten minutes shopping in a Buckle store located in an Augusta mall.

  3. Golias v. Boyce

    367 Ga. App. 831 (Ga. Ct. App. 2023)

    See Ramsey v. Middleton , 310 Ga. App. 300, 302, 713 S.E.2d 428 (2011) (evidence admitted at the hearing was insufficient to establish the necessary "pattern" of harassing and intimidating behavior); Autry v. State , 306 Ga. App. 125, 128, 701 S.E.2d 596 (2010) (behavior underlying stalking count fell short of demonstrating the requisite pattern). Compare Little v. Booker , 346 Ga. App. 305, 308 (2), 816 S.E.2d 148 (2018) (numerous instances of surveilling or contacting victim at her home and in public without her consent sufficient to establish pattern of harassing and intimidating behavior); Austin v. State , 335 Ga. App. 521, 524-525 (1), 782 S.E.2d 308 (2016) (unceasing attempts to watch, communicate with, or harass victim established requisite pattern of behavior, despite fact that behavior was not overtly threatening). We recognize that Boyce has the sole right to make decisions regarding her children.

  4. Maynard v. State

    355 Ga. App. 84 (Ga. Ct. App. 2020)   Cited 3 times
    Holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the State, over objection, to present testimony of the victim of harassing communications that he had obtained temporary protective orders both for himself and for his client in a child support dispute with the defendant

    The series of e-mails that preceded Maynard's January 27, 2019 appearance at Mills's house established the required pattern of behavior. See Austin v. State , 335 Ga. App. 521, 524 (1), 782 S.E.2d 308 (2016) (pattern of behavior "may include the prior history between the parties"). And although Maynard challenges the sufficiency of the evidence showing that he had the necessary intent to be found guilty of stalking, given the evidence of his "persistent, disturbing actions, and his refusal to leave [Mills] alone, a rational jury could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that [his] acts were intended to harass and intimidate and placed [Mills] in fear for [his and his family's] safety."