Hightower v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hightower v. State

619 S.E.2d 387, 274 Ga. App. 875, 2005 Fulton County D. Rep. 2551, 2005 Ga. App. LEXIS 860

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedAugust 3, 2005

DocketA05A1066

StatusPublished

This text of 619 S.E.2d 387 (Hightower 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

Hightower v. State, 619 S.E.2d 387, 274 Ga. App. 875, 2005 Fulton County D. Rep. 2551, 2005 Ga. App. LEXIS 860 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Phipps, Judge.

A jury found Damon Terad Hightower guilty of burglary, aggravated assault, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and possession of a firearm during the commission of the crime of aggravated assault. Appealing his convictions of these crimes, he contends that the state improperly placed his character in issue by eliciting [876]*876testimony that he had not paid child support. Hightower has failed to demonstrate reversible error. Thus, we affirm.

Decided August 3, 2005. James W. Bradley, for appellant. Robert E. Keller, District Attorney, Anece Baxter White, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

The state’s evidence showed that on April 10, 2004, Hightower broke into his former girlfriend’s home, where their children also lived, and threatened her with a gun. Hightower testified that he had gone to his former girlfriend’s home to get their children at her request, that he had knocked on the door, and that one of their sons had opened it for him. Hightower recounted that an argument had ensued, but denied having had a gun.

On appeal, Hightower complains about the following exchange that occurred during his cross-examination: “Q. And during that time period she was talking [sic] care of those kids on her own. You weren’t giving her child support or anything like that, right? A. No. We was both doing — we was doing it the same. It was equal.” In addition, Hightower complains about the following exchange that occurred during rebuttal testimony of his former girlfriend: “Q. And was he paying child support and helping take care of his kids as far as monetary-wise? A. No, ma’am. He did for the kids, but child support, no, he didn’t.” The record shows that defense counsel made no objection when the state elicited this testimony. Consequently, there is nothing for us to review.¹

Judgment affirmed.

Andrews, P. J., and Mikell, J., concur.

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

Phipps, Judge.

A jury found Damon Terad Hightower guilty of burglary, aggravated assault, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and possession of a firearm during the commission of the crime of aggravated assault. Appealing his convictions of these crimes, he contends that the state improperly placed his character in issue by eliciting [876]*876testimony that he had not paid child support. Hightower has failed to demonstrate reversible error. Thus, we affirm.

Decided August 3, 2005. James W. Bradley, for appellant. Robert E. Keller, District Attorney, Anece Baxter White, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

The state’s evidence showed that on April 10, 2004, Hightower broke into his former girlfriend’s home, where their children also lived, and threatened her with a gun. Hightower testified that he had gone to his former girlfriend’s home to get their children at her request, that he had knocked on the door, and that one of their sons had opened it for him. Hightower recounted that an argument had ensued, but denied having had a gun.

On appeal, Hightower complains about the following exchange that occurred during his cross-examination: “Q. And during that time period she was talking [sic] care of those kids on her own. You weren’t giving her child support or anything like that, right? A. No. We was both doing — we was doing it the same. It was equal.” In addition, Hightower complains about the following exchange that occurred during rebuttal testimony of his former girlfriend: “Q. And was he paying child support and helping take care of his kids as far as monetary-wise? A. No, ma’am. He did for the kids, but child support, no, he didn’t.” The record shows that defense counsel made no objection when the state elicited this testimony. Consequently, there is nothing for us to review.¹

Judgment affirmed.

Andrews, P. J., and Mikell, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

619 S.E.2d 387, 274 Ga. App. 875, 2005 Fulton County D. Rep. 2551, 2005 Ga. App. LEXIS 860, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hightower-v-state-gactapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack