Latoya Thornton v. State
Opinion
SECOND DIVISION BARNES, P. J., MILLER and RAY, JJ.
NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. http://www.gaappeals.us/rules/
December 13, 2013
In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A13A1867. THORNTON v. THE STATE.
MILLER, Judge.
Latoya Thornton was charged by accusation with the offense of simple battery.
Thornton filed a general demurrer and motion to quash the accusation on the ground
that the indictment was fatally defective since it charged “Latoia Jordan,” a person
not known to Thornton. The trial court denied Thornton’s motion, concluding the
accusation was not rendered defective due to a fatal variance because it charged her
as the perpetrator by use of an alias, which constituted a permissible misnomer. This
Court granted Thornton’s application for interlocutory appeal. On appeal, Thornton
contends the accusation should have been quashed because it charged her with a
name by which she is not known. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. The record shows that in February 2006, Thornton was arrested on the charge
of simple battery and transported to the Fulton County Jail, where she was booked
under the name “Latoia Jordan.” Thornton admitted that between 2005 and 2012, she
had been arrested and transported to the Fulton County Jail at least three times, and
each time she was processed under the name Latoia Jordan. Thornton stated that her
date of birth was February 7, 1974, and this matched the information on the booking
sheet for Latoia Jordan. Following her arrest, Thornton was released on bond.
The State charged Thornton by accusation in January 2008. The accusation –
Case No. 08CR329759 – listed the name Latoia Jordan. In August 2008, the trial
court forfeited Latoia Jordan’s bond due to her failure to appear and ordered an
execution hearing. The trial court subsequently entered an order relieving the surety
of liability, and in its order, the trial court specifically listed Latoia Jordan’s alias as
Latoya Thornton.
In September 2012, Thornton signed a waiver for formal arraignment in this
case – the January 2008 accusation filed against Latoia Jordan. She then filed a
general demurrer and motion to quash the accusation on the ground that it charged
a person not known to Thornton. The trial court denied her motion, and this appeal
ensued.
2 Thornton contends that the accusation is fatally defective because it charged
by a name by which she is not known. We disagree.
Although styled as a general demurrer and motion to quash accusation,
Thornton’s motion in substance was a plea of misnomer. See Miller v. State, 264 Ga.
App. 801, 803 (b) (592 SE2d 450) (2003) (noting that in reviewing filings, we look
to substance over nomenclature). In a plea of misnomer, the defendant generally
claims that she is not the person named in indictment or accusation, and that she is
not known or called by the name of the accused. See OCGA § 17-7-112. “However,
a defendant may be indicted [or charged by accusation] properly under a name by
which [s]he is generally known and called, whether this be [her] true name or not.”
(Punctuation and footnote omitted.) Vanorsdall v. State, 241 Ga. App. 871, 876 (2)
(d) (528 SE2d 312) (2000). Consequently, to sustain a plea of misnomer, the accused
must show that she was never known under the name used in the accusation. See
Walker v. State, 113 Ga. App. 526, 527 (1) (149 SE2d 153) (1966).
In this case, the record supports the trial court’s decision that the accusation
properly charged Thornton. Notably, Thornton admitted that she had been previously
arrested and booked into jail under the name Latoia Jordan, and Jordan’s listed date
of birth matched that of Thornton. Additionally, Thornton signed a waiver of formal
3 arraignment in this case, which specifically listed her name as Jordan a/k/a
“Thornton.” Consequently, contrary to Thornton’s claims, the evidence clearly shows
that Jordan was another name by which Thornton was known.
In support of her argument, Thornton cites to Culpepper v. State, 173 Ga. 799
(161 SE2d 623) (1931) and Noeske v. State, 181 Ga. App. 778 (353 SE2d 635) (1987)
and, but those cases are inapposite. Although Culpepper stated that omission of the
defendant’s surname constituted a fatal variance, the fatal defect in the accusation
was that it did not designate the defendant by his own proper name or misnomer as
the perpetrator of the offense charged. Culpepper, supra, 173 Ga. at 800. In Noeske,
the accusation was fatally defective because it clearly charged someone other than the
defendant. See Noeske, supra, 181 Ga. App. at 779-780 (2). The reason the
accusations in Culpepper and Noeske were fatal was that they designated a distinct
and separate person as the perpetrator of the offense. In this case, however, Thornton
does not make a claim that she was not the person charged with simple battery for the
underlying incident. Indeed, she admits to having been arrested for the offense and
that she would be able to defend herself against the pending charges. Rather, her
claim is that she was accused under the wrong name, but this is insufficient to carry
her burden to sustain a plea of misnomer because the evidence shows that she was
4 known by Latoia Jordan. See Walker, supra, 113 Ga. App. at 527 (1). Moreover,
notice provided by use of an alias or other name by which a defendant is known is
constitutionally sufficient. State v. Grube, 293 Ga. 257, 261 (2) (744 SE2d 1) (2013).
Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s denial of Thornton’s general demurrer and
motion to quash accusation.
Judgment affirmed. Barnes, P. J., and Ray, J., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Latoya Thornton v. State (Latoya Thornton v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.