Merrell v. State

14 Citing cases

  1. Howard v. the State

    288 Ga. 741 (Ga. 2011)   Cited 41 times
    Holding that the trial court's failure to separately define simple assault, which is an essential element of aggravated assault, would not have affected the outcome of the case since the defendant's defense was mistaken identity and did not challenge the evidence showing that a simple assault had occurred

    See also Willis v. State, 214 Ga. App. 479-480 (1) ( 448 SE2d 223) (1994). Compare Merrell v. State, 162 Ga. App. 886, 887 (2) ( 293 SE2d 474) (1982). Reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdicts, we conclude that it was sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt that each Appellant was guilty of all of the crimes for which he was convicted.

  2. Chase v. State

    277 Ga. 636 (Ga. 2004)   Cited 44 times
    Noting "[w]hile there was no question that appellant fired a gun through the floor, striking his wife in the room below in the top of her head, there was no evidence from which the jury could find the victim had been placed in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury."

    Brinson v. State, 272 Ga. 345, 347 (1) ( 529 S.E.2d 129) (2000). See also Merrell v. State, 162 Ga. App. 886, 887 (2) ( 293 S.E.2d 474) (1982) ("`aggravated assault has two essential elements: (1) that an assault (as defined in [OCGA § 16-5-20] was committed on the victim; and (2) that it was aggravated by (a) an intention to murder, to rape, or to rob, or (b) use of a deadly weapon . . .'" or by firing a weapon from within a motor vehicle). The indictment charged appellant with aggravated assault by "assault[ing the victim] with a gun, a deadly weapon, by shooting her," and with felony murder, with the underlying felony being aggravated assault "by shooting [the victim] with a deadly weapon."

  3. Tiller v. State

    267 Ga. 888 (Ga. 1997)   Cited 15 times
    Upholding an aggravated assault conviction where “the jury was authorized to find that [the victim] was placed in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury, since he heard the shot and fell to the ground to avoid being shot at again”

    It follows that the evidence was sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find proof beyond a reasonable doubt of Tiller's guilt of committing an aggravated assault against Reynolds under OCGA § 16-5-20 (a) (1) or (2). Jackson v. Virginia, supra. Compare Phillips v. State, 250 Ga. 336, 338 (3) ( 297 S.E.2d 217) (1982) and Merrell v. State, 162 Ga. App. 886, 887 (2) ( 293 S.E.2d 474) (1982) (no evidence of defendant's attempt to commit a violent injury or of victim's reasonable apprehension of receiving a violent injury). 4.

  4. Durden v. State

    327 Ga. App. 173 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 5 times

    “[A]ggravated assault has two essential elements: (1) that an assault (as defined in [OCGA § 16–5–20] ) was committed on the victim; and (2) that it was aggravated by (a) an intention to murder, to rape, or to rob, or (b) use of a deadly weapon.” Merrell v. State, 162 Ga.App. 886, 887(2), 293 S.E.2d 474 (1982). Here both aggravated assault counts included the assault element under OCGA § 16–5–20 and the aggravation element under OCGA § 16–5–21.

  5. Durden v. State

    A13A2138 (Ga. Ct. App. Mar. 26, 2014)

    "[A]ggravated assault has two essential elements: (1) that an assault (as defined in [OCGA § 16-5-20]) was committed on the victim; and (2) that it was aggravated by (a) an intention to murder, to rape, or to rob, or (b) use of a deadly weapon." Merrell v. State, 162 Ga. App. 886, 887 (2) (293 SE2d 474) (1982). Here both aggravated assault counts included the assault element under OCGA § 16-5-20 and the aggravation element under OCGA § 16-5-21.

  6. McGuire v. State

    266 Ga. App. 673 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 16 times

    " Id. at (a) (2). "[A]ggravated assault has two essential elements: (1) that an assault (as defined in [OCGA § 16-5-20]) was committed on the victim; and (2) that it was aggravated by (a) an intention to murder, to rape, or to rob, or (b) use of a deadly weapon. . . ." Merrell v. State, 162 Ga. App. 886, 887 (2) ( 293 SE2d 474) (1982). McGuire asserts that the trial court erred in charging the jury on the two subsections, when the indictment alleged only one manner of aggravated assault.

  7. Hill v. State

    259 Ga. App. 363 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003)   Cited 6 times
    Holding that the trial court did not err in reducing a defendant’s conviction for second-degree criminal damage to property to criminal trespass to property when the State failed to prove damage in excess of $500

    Because the salient difference between criminal trespass as defined in OCGA § 16-7-21(a) and second degree criminal damage to property is the amount of damage required for conviction, criminal trespass is a lesser included offense of second degree damage to property. See Merrell v. State, 162 Ga. App. 886, 887(3) ( 293 S.E.2d 474) (1982). (Punctuation omitted.)

  8. Maynor v. State

    257 Ga. App. 151 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 23 times
    Noting that simple assault is an attempted battery under OCGA § 16–5–20 that focuses on the intention of the perpetrator to injure the victim

    Motes v. State, 192 Ga. App. 302 ( 384 S.E.2d 463) (1989).Merrell v. State, 162 Ga. App. 886 ( 293 S.E.2d 474) (1982). In contrast, in the present case, the victims' testimony clearly establishes reasonable apprehension of harm. While J. B. testified that she did not believe the first shot was a gun firing, she realized she was under attack when the shots hit her house.

  9. Jennings v. State

    486 S.E.2d 693 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 6 times

    Because the salient difference between criminal trespass as defined in OCGA § 16-7-21 (a) and second degree criminal damage to property is the amount of damage required for conviction, criminal trespass is a lesser included offense of second degree criminal damage to property. See Merrell v. State, 162 Ga. App. 886, 887 (3) ( 293 S.E.2d 474) (1982). The trial court therefore did not err in submitting the criminal trespass charge to the jury.

  10. Krause v. Vance

    207 Ga. App. 615 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 22 times
    Upholding "civil murder," or "slayer's rule" verdict that husband who murdered his wife could not recover her life insurance policy proceeds or inherit her estate

    The reference to a lie detector test was insignificant and the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a mistrial. Merrell v. State, 162 Ga. App. 886, 888 (4) ( 293 S.E.2d 474) (1982). 11.