Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Garrett v. State

Garrett v. State

372 S.E.2d 506, 188 Ga. App. 176, 1988 Ga. App. LEXIS 939
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 6, 1988
Docket76402
StatusPublished
Cited by24 cases

This text of 372 S.E.2d 506 (Garrett v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Garrett v. State, 372 S.E.2d 506, 188 Ga. App. 176, 1988 Ga. App. LEXIS 939 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988).

Opinion

Beasley, Judge.

Defendant appeals his convictions for child molestation, OCGA § 16-6-4, and sodomy, OCGA § 16-6-2.

1. Defendant contends that he was entitled to a mistrial because the prosecution in its opening statement made reference to acts of the defendant towards the victim which, although the prosecutor did not expressly so state, would in law constitute rape, a crime with which he was not charged. This enumeration of error is meritless, for a number of reasons, one of which is that the State-anticipated evidence referred to was within the scope of the crimes charged, so that mention of it was not cause for mistrial.

“The state is entitled to present evidence of the entire res gestae of the crime. Even though a defendant is not charged with every crime committed during a criminal transaction, every aspect of it relevant to the crime charged may be presented at trial. Chambers v. State, 250 Ga. 856 [at 859 (2)] (302 SE2d 86) (1983). This is true even if the defendant’s character is incidentally placed in issue.” Satterfield v. State, 256 Ga. 593, 598 (6) (351 SE2d 625) (1987). Bradberry v. State, 170 Ga. 859 (2) (154 SE 344) (1930); Cawthorn v. State, 119 Ga. 395, 409 (46 SE 897) (1903).

*177 Decided September 6, 1988. Steve Bennett, for appellant. Stephen F. Lanier, District Attorney, Pamela H. Sellers, Fred R. Simpson, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellee.

2. Defendant asserts he was entitled to mistrial because of the State’s opening statement and introduction of evidence via the examining physician’s testimony that defendant committed similar acts against the victim on previous occasions, because he was not notified prior to the trial as required by USCR 31.3.

Because the date alleged in the indictment was not an essential averment, evidence of similar acts occurring within the statute of limitation was evidence of the crime charged and did not fall within the ambit of the rule relating to notice of the State’s intention to present evidence of similar transactions. Bowman v. State, 184 Ga. App. 197 (2) (361 SE2d 58) (1987); Pittman v. State, 179 Ga. App. 760 (1) (348 SE2d 107) (1986). Mistrial was not warranted.

3. Defendant’s last enumeration of error is that he could not be convicted of both sodomy and child molestation because child molestation is a lesser included offense of sodomy.

“OCGA § 16-6-4 (a) is not a lesser included offense of OCGA § 16-6-2, as a matter of law . . . .” Hill v. State, 183 Ga. App. 654, 658 (4) (360 SE2d 4) (1987). If both convictions were based upon the same, single act, only one conviction could stand. McCollum v. State, 177 Ga. App. 40 (1) (338 SE2d 460) (1985). However, the indictment as drawn charged defendant specifically with two separate and different sexual acts. The child molestation was proved without any reference to the act of sodomy and was factually and legally distinct from it. See Haynes v. State, 249 Ga. 119, 120 (288 SE2d 185) (1982). For this reason, the two sentences entered were authorized.

Judgment affirmed.

Birdsong, C. J., and Banke, P. J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Reed v. State
678 S.E.2d 560 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2009)
Buggay v. State
588 S.E.2d 244 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2003)
Simpson v. State
507 S.E.2d 860 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1998)
Miller v. State
486 S.E.2d 911 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1997)
Newport v. State
480 S.E.2d 868 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1997)
Johnson v. State
447 S.E.2d 663 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1994)
Robinson v. State
445 S.E.2d 564 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1994)
Burton v. State
441 S.E.2d 470 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1994)
Riddle v. State
430 S.E.2d 153 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1993)
Harmon v. State
430 S.E.2d 399 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1993)
Moody v. State
425 S.E.2d 397 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
Kirkland v. State
424 S.E.2d 638 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
Branam v. State
419 S.E.2d 86 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
Carroll v. State
415 S.E.2d 37 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
Foreman v. State
408 S.E.2d 178 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1991)
Nolton v. State
396 S.E.2d 605 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Sweet v. State
396 S.E.2d 82 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Story v. State
396 S.E.2d 547 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Murphy v. State
395 S.E.2d 76 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Close v. State
394 S.E.2d 563 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
372 S.E.2d 506, 188 Ga. App. 176, 1988 Ga. App. LEXIS 939, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garrett-v-state-gactapp-1988.