Bowen, 832 F.2d at 550. See Dick v. Kemp, 833 F.2d 1448 (11th Cir. 1987); Kirk v. State, 168 Ga. App. 226, 308 S.E.2d 592, 598 (1983) ("The evidence of possible insanity put on by appellant required a charge on that defense. However, the giving of that charge did not preclude the possibility that the jury would reject that defense.
DECIDED FEBRUARY 3, 1984. Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Georgia — 168 Ga. App. 226. Parker Walls, James I. Parker, Michael C. Walls, for appellant.
Hearsay is admissible in a criminal case for the limited purpose of proving the existence of a witness' prior inconsistent statement. Kirk v. State, 168 Ga. App. 226, 230 (7) ( 308 S.E.2d 592); Burke v. State, 163 Ga. App. 67, 68 (1) ( 293 S.E.2d 872); Bradley v. State, 163 Ga. App. 670, 672 (3) ( 224 S.E.2d 778). Appellant's enumeration "`is without merit as the statement [objected to as hearsay] was offered in rebuttal to impeach a witness. (Cit.)' [Cit.
2. As appellant did not raise any objections to the charge in the court below, it cannot be heard to complain of an alleged error on appeal. Kirk v. State, 168 Ga. App. 226 ( 308 S.E.2d 592) (1983). Indeed, counsel commented that he "thought it was a very fair charge."
Brown v. State, 228 Ga. 215, 217 ( 184 S.E.2d 655)." Kirk v. State, 168 Ga. App. 226, 230 (9) ( 308 S.E.2d 592) (affirmed on other grounds, 252 Ga. 133 ( 311 S.E.2d 821)). Since the delusion allegedly suffered by the defendant (that the victim was his wife) does not justify defendant's actions constituting the crimes of aggravated assault (with intent to rape) and kidnapping, a charge on delusional compulsion was not required. Judgment affirmed. Banke, C. J., and Benham, J., concur.
Cooper v. State, 163 Ga. App. 482, 485 (4) ( 295 S.E.2d 161) (1982). Accord Dollar v. State, 168 Ga. App. 726 (2) ( 310 S.E.2d 236) (1983); Kirk v. State, 168 Ga. App. 226, 231 (11) ( 308 S.E.2d 592) (1983), aff'd 252 Ga. 133 ( 311 S.E.2d 821) (1984). Compare Butler v. State, 252 Ga. 135 ( 311 S.E.2d 473) (1984).
Contrary to Bonner's assertions, he placed his intent at issue during trial by pleading not guilty by reason of insanity. See Kirk v. State , 168 Ga. App. 226, 231, 308 S.E.2d 592 1983 (Trial court did not err in instructing the jury on the State's burden to prove criminal intent where defendant pled not guilty by reason of insanity.). Therefore, the Rule 404 (b) evidence about the 2008 incident involving Bonner was relevant and the State was permitted to use it to show Bonner's intent at the time of the shooting.