Buruca v. State

33 Citing cases

  1. Clemente v. State

    769 S.E.2d 790 (Ga. Ct. App. 2015)

    However, whether Clemente was a party to the crimes and aided and abetted the other four men in the armed robbery or intentionally advised, encouraged, or counseled them, is a question for the jury. See Buruca v. State, 278 Ga.App. 650, 652(1), 629 S.E.2d 438 (2006).And, contrary to his assertions, the State presented evidence demonstrating more than Clemente's mere presence.

  2. Clemente v. State.

    769 S.E.2d 790 (Ga. Ct. App. 2015)

    However, whether Clemente was a party to the crimes and aided and abetted the other four men in the armed robbery or intentionally advised, encouraged, or counseled them, is a question for the jury. See Buruca v. State, 278 Ga.App. 650, 652(1), 629 S.E.2d 438 (2006). And, contrary to his assertions, the State presented evidence demonstrating more than Clemente's mere presence.

  3. McGordon v. State

    679 S.E.2d 743 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 2 times

    (Footnote omitted.) Buruca v. State, 278 Ga. App. 650, 652 (1) ( 629 SE2d 438) (2006). Whether McGordon was a party to the crimes charged here was a question for the jury.

  4. Olds v. State

    293 Ga. App. 884 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 8 times
    Concluding that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant as a party to the crime of armed robbery when he was caught driving the getaway vehicle, he matched the witnesses' description of the perpetrators, and the stolen items were found in his vehicle

    (Footnote omitted.) Buruca v. State, 278 Ga. App. 650, 652 (1) ( 629 SE2d 438) (2006). See OCGA § 16-2-20 (b) (3), (4).

  5. Wilson v. State

    810 S.E.2d 303 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018)   Cited 5 times

    1. On appeal from a criminal conviction, the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, and a defendant no longer enjoys a presumption of innocence. See Buruca v. State , 278 Ga. App. 650, 629 S.E.2d 438 (2006). We do not weigh the evidence or resolve credibility issues, but merely determine whether the jury was authorized to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

  6. Simon v. State

    739 S.E.2d 34 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 2 times
    In Simon, the Court of Appeals failed to acknowledge this settled principle of law, and nothing in its opinion suggests that the Court of Appeals even considered whether McClain ultimately was denied a "competent and unbiased jury.

    It is only when the evidence is insupportable as a matter of law that the jury's verdict may be disturbed, even where the evidence is entirely circumstantial.Buruca v. State, 278 Ga.App. 650, 652–653(1), 629 S.E.2d 438 (2006) (footnote omitted).And,

  7. Romero v. State

    307 Ga. App. 348 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 6 times
    Finding that evidence was sufficient to show that defendant was a party to aggravated assault when defendant accompanied attacker to the crime scene and stood by while another man attacked the victim

    (Punctuation and footnote omitted.) Buruca v. State, 278 Ga. App. 650, 652 (1) ( 629 SE2d 438) (2006). Further, "(w)here a getaway driver waited for his co-defendant ( ) to return to the car, the driver was also guilty of his co-defendant('s) crimes."

  8. Boggs v. State

    304 Ga. App. 698 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 9 times

    (Footnote omitted.) Buruca v. State, 278 Ga. App. 650, 652-653 (1) ( 629 SE2d 438) (2006). See Gresham v. State, 246 Ga. App. 705, 707 (2) ( 541 SE2d 679) (2000) ("[W]e have no legal yardstick by which we can ordinarily determine what in a given case is a reasonable hypothesis, save the opinion of twelve upright and intelligent jurors.") (footnote omitted).

  9. Leslie v. State

    355 Ga. App. 244 (Ga. Ct. App. 2020)   Cited 2 times

    And, whether a person was a party to the crime and aided and abetted in the commission of the offense or intentionally advised, encouraged, or counseled another, are questions for the jury. Buruca v. State , 278 Ga. App. 650, 652 (1), 629 S.E.2d 438 (2006). As shown above, the movement of the victim was not merely incidental to the armed robbery, but served to make the commission of the crime substantially easier by concealing and isolating the victim and giving the assailants greater control.

  10. Puckett v. State

    342 Ga. App. 518 (Ga. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 8 times

    See Buruca v. State, 278 Ga. App. 650 , 653 (1) (629 SE2d 438 ) (2006) (The evidence, although circumstantial, was sufficient for the jury to find that the defendant was the “getaway” driver who assisted others in committing an armed robbery and, as a result, to convict him as a party to the crime, noting that the jury “heard and clearly rejected [the defendant’s] claim that the robbery was a spur of the moment idea of which he had no knowledge.”) (punctuationomitted)