From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Darns v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Apr 17, 2001
A01A0555 (Ga. Ct. App. Apr. 17, 2001)

Opinion

A01A0555.

DECIDED: APRIL 17, 2001


A jury found Seneca Terry Darns guilty of aggravated assault. Darns appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm.

In reviewing Darns' challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we do not weigh the evidence or determine witness credibility. Instead, we review the evidence presented at trial in the light most favorable to support the jury's verdict and determine whether this evidence is sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find Darns guilty of aggravated assault beyond a reasonable doubt.

See Russell v. State, 230 Ga. App. 546, 549(4) ( 497 S.E.2d 36) (1998).

See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 ( 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979).

Viewed in this light, the evidence shows that the assault victim was Rita Glines. At approximately 10:00 on the evening of the assault, Glines went to Room 140 of the Bartow Motel because she "had a little craving . . . [t]o smoke some crack rock." Glines did not know the people in Room 140, but knew that she could purchase crack cocaine there. When Glines arrived, there were a few people in the room, including Darns and two of his acquaintances, Jessica McFarlin and Kimberly Ramsey. After Glines smoked two rocks, Darns, Ramsey and McFarlin left the room. Shortly thereafter, McFarlin reentered the room and accused Glines of being a police officer. McFarlin then grabbed Glines' pocketbook and told Glines to accompany her outside.

Once outside, McFarlin took Glines to a car. Waiting inside the car were Darns in the driver's seat and Ramsey in the back seat. Glines thought they were going to get more crack cocaine and joined Ramsey in the back seat. After McFarlin sat in the front seat, Darns drove away from the motel. According to Glines, while Darns was driving, everyone in the car remained silent.

Eventually, Darns turned onto a dirt road and pulled the car into a driveway. After stopping, somebody in the car told Glines to get out. According to Glines, "[t]hey opened up the door and I stepped out of the car and somebody started jabbing me in the back of my head. . . . I mean just stabbed me in the back of my head and around my neck." Glines then felt "a blow to [her] head" and stumbled towards the rear of the car. Glines managed to escape to a nearby residence where the homeowner called for emergency assistance, and Glines was taken to a hospital and treated for multiple stab wounds. After the assault, McFarlin, Ramsey and Darns got back in the car, and Darns drove them back to the Bartow Motel. At trial, Glines positively identified Darns as the driver of the car.

Darns, McFarlin and Ramsey were all charged with aggravated assault. Although Darns did not testify at trial, an investigating officer who interviewed him testified that Darns acknowledged visiting the Bartow Motel that evening, but claimed that when he left the motel he went directly home. Both McFarlin and Ramsey did testify, and both stated that Darns drove them and the victim to the scene of the assault, was present during the assault, and drove the car back to the Bartow motel after the assault.

On appeal Darns claims "the testimony concerning [his] presence at the scene of the crime is inconsistent at best," and that even if he was present, the evidence did not establish that he was a party to the assault.

We disagree. Under O.C.G.A. § 16-2-20 (a), "[e]very person concerned in the commission of a crime is a party thereto and may be charged with and convicted of commission of the crime." Although mere presence at the crime scene is insufficient to show that a person is concerned in the commission of a crime, an individual who "[i]ntentionally aids or abets in the commission of the crime" is a party to the crime.

See Oakes v. State, 233 Ga. App. 684, 685(1) ( 505 S.E.2d 33) (1998).

In this case, the evidence was not limited to Darns' mere presence at the crime scene. Instead, Glines' unequivocal trial testimony and the testimony of Darn's co-defendants established that Darns transported everyone, including the victim, to the scene of the assault, and both McFarlin and Ramsey testified that after the assault, Darns drove them away from the crime scene and back to the motel. This evidence was sufficient to permit a jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Darns was a party to the aggravated assault.

See Oakes, supra; Hemphill v. State, 242 Ga. App. 751, 752(1) ( 531 S.E.2d 150) (2000).

We do not authorize the reporting of this opinion as it does not announce a new rule or policy, or involve an interpretation that is not already precedent.

Judgment affirmed. Johnson, P.J., and Ellington, J., concur.


Summaries of

Darns v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Apr 17, 2001
A01A0555 (Ga. Ct. App. Apr. 17, 2001)
Case details for

Darns v. State

Case Details

Full title:DARNS v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Apr 17, 2001

Citations

A01A0555 (Ga. Ct. App. Apr. 17, 2001)