That rationale is not present in a case where the jury decides only the guilt-innocence of the defendant. See, e.g., Prather v. State, 247 Ga. 789 ( 279 S.E.2d 697) (1981), Mayo v. State. 139 Ga. App. 520 ( 229 S.E.2d 16) (1976), and Smith v. State, 146 Ga. App. 428 ( 246 S.E.2d 442) (1978). Nonetheless, we held in Vance v. State, 262 Ga. 236 ( 416 S.E.2d 516) (1992), that a trial court properly allowed a prosecutor to argue future dangerousness in the guilt-innocence stage of a non-capital case.
Vogleson v. State, supra at 564 (3) (Eldridge, J., dissenting) citing Green v. State, 206 Ga. App. 539, 541 (2) ( 426 S.E.2d 65) (1992).Bellamy v. State, 272 Ga. 157, 159 (4) ( 527 S.E.2d 867) (2000); Harris v. State, 234 Ga. 871, 873 ( 218 S.E.2d 583) (1975); Ford v. State, 232 Ga. 511, 518 (14) ( 207 S.E.2d 494) (1974); Moore v. State, 228 Ga. 662, 665 (5) ( 187 S.E.2d 277) accord Fletcher v. State, 197 Ga. App. 112, 113 (3) ( 397 S.E.2d 605) (1990); Lewis v. State, 158 Ga. App. 575 ( 281 S.E.2d 318) (1981); Evans v. State, 146 Ga. App. 480 (2) ( 246 S.E.2d 482) (1978); Hill v. State, 144 Ga. App. 259 (2) ( 241 S.E.2d 44) (1977); Mayo v. State, 139 Ga. App. 520 (1) ( 229 S.E.2d 16) (1976). Because Vogleson represents a stark abandonment of stare decisis, it should be overruled.
Rolland v. State, 235 Ga. 808, 811 ( 221 S.E.2d 582) (1976). See Maddox v. State, 152 Ga. App. 384 (1) ( 262 S.E.2d 636) (1979); Mayo v. State, 139 Ga. App. 520 (3) ( 229 S.E.2d 16) (1976). The trial court did not err in denying the request to charge.
We find nothing in the emphasized language of the above charge which pertains to possible sentences for the crime charged. Compare, "Mayo v. State, 139 Ga. App. 520 (1) ( 229 S.E.2d 16), wherein it was held: `It is error to instruct the jury as to a possible sentence in a felony case before the jury has determined the question of guilt or innocence. Ford v. State, 232 Ga. 511, 518 (14) ( 207 S.E.2d 494); Moore v. State, 228 Ga. 662, 665 (5) ( 187 S.E.2d 277); Harris v. State, 234 Ga. 871, 873 ( 218 S.E.2d 583).' Accord, Hill v. State, 144 Ga. App. 259 (2) ( 241 S.E.2d 44); Evans v. State, 146 Ga. App. 480 (2) ( 246 S.E.2d 482)." Lewis v. State, 158 Ga. App. 575 ( 281 S.E.2d 318).
The judge, not the jury, determines the sentence (Code Ann. § 27-2503; Ga. L. 1974, pp. 352, 357) and the failure to give a charge with regard to sentencing matters is not error. Smokes v. State, 136 Ga. App. 8 (5) ( 220 S.E.2d 39); Stanley v. State, 136 Ga. App. 385 (2) ( 221 S.E.2d 242). See Mayo v. State, 139 Ga. App. 520 (1) ( 229 S.E.2d 16), wherein it was held: "It is error to instruct the jury as to a possible sentence in a felony case before the jury has determined the question of guilt or innocence. Ford v. State, 232 Ga. 511, 518 (14) ( 207 S.E.2d 494); Moore v. State, 228 Ga. 662, 665 (5) ( 187 S.E.2d 277); Harris v. State, 234 Ga. 871, 873 ( 218 S.E.2d 583)." Accord, Hill v. State, 144 Ga. App. 259 (2) ( 241 S.E.2d 44); Evans v. State, 146 Ga. App. 480 (2) ( 246 S.E.2d 482).
Sustaining the state's objection, the trial court instructed defense counsel not to go into punishment. The court acted properly in so ruling. See, e.g., Mayo v. State, 139 Ga. App. 520 (1) ( 229 S.E.2d 16). Finding no error for any reason assigned, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Accordingly, they are deemed abandoned. Mayo v. State, 139 Ga. App. 520 (4) ( 229 S.E.2d 16). Judgment affirmed. Quillian, P. J., and Birdsong, J., concur.
"Criminal trials are conducted in a bifurcated or two-step procedure... The first phase determines guilt or innocence and the second phase, upon return of a guilty verdict, determines the sentence to be imposed as required by Code Ann. § 27-2503 (Ga. L. 1974, pp. 352, 357). It is error to instruct the jury as to a possible sentence in a felony case before the jury has determined the question of guilt or innocence. [Cits.]." Mayo v. State, 139 Ga. App. 520 ( 229 S.E.2d 16) (1976). The court is not permitted to instruct the jury that a defendant can be punished for a misdemeanor on a lesser included offense.
"It is error to instruct the jury as to a possible sentence in a felony case before the jury has determined the question of guilt or innocence." Mayo v. State, 139 Ga. App. 520 (1) ( 229 S.E.2d 16) and cits. There is no merit in this complaint. 3. Appellant complains that the trial court erroneously charged the jury as to appellant's plea of "not guilty by reason of mental incompetence."