Nicholas Fitzgerald v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
• Decided: February 10, 2026
• Docket: A25A1961
• Status: Published

Opinion

FIFTH DIVISION MCFADDEN, P. J., HODGES and PIPKIN, 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. https://www.gaappeals.us/rules

February 10, 2026

In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A25A1961. FITZGERALD v. THE STATE.

PIPKIN, Judge.

Appellant Nicholas Scott Fitzgerald was indicted for aggravated assault,

possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, and pointing a gun at

another in relation to crimes committed against Erik Blanco-Ortiz. After a bench trial,1

Fitzgerald was found guilty of all counts, and he was sentenced to 10 years on

probation for aggravated assault and the possession charge; the charge for pointing a

gun at another merged for sentencing purposes. Fitzgerald’s sole contention on appeal

1 There was a long delay between indictment and trial because Fitzgerald was found to be incompetent to stand trial. He was eventually rehabilitated and deemed competent. is that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions. For the reasons that

follow, we affirm.

When evaluating such claims, “we must determine whether, viewing the

evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, any rational trier of fact could have

found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Kennedy v.

State, 371 Ga. App. 163, 164 (1) (899 SE2d 803) (2024) (citation and punctuation

omitted). It is also well settled that “[t]he trier of fact decides the witness’s credibility

and the reasonableness of a hypothesis, such as a claim of self-defense” and, therefore,

“a trier of fact may reject a claim of self-defense.” In re O.L., 326 Ga. App. 640, 644

(757 SE2d 236) (2014) (citations and punctuation omitted). With these principles in

mind, and construing the evidence to support the verdict, see Jackson v. Virginia, 443

U. S. 307 (99 SCt 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979), the evidence at trial showed the

following.

In November 2016, Blanco-Ortiz and Fitzgerald lived in townhouses next door

to one another. On the date of the incident, Blanco-Ortiz was outside detailing one of

the neighbor’s cars when Fitzgerald exited his home and began walking toward

Blanco-Ortiz, telling him to “take your shit out of my lawn” and asking numerous

2 times “do you want to die” while holding a hunting knife. Fitzgerald continued to

approach Blanco-Ortiz, repeating these phrases and, eventually, pulling out a gun,

racking a bullet into the chamber, and pointing the weapon at Blanco-Ortiz’s head

while standing approximately six inches away. Blanco-Ortiz testified that he was

unarmed, afraid, and “really thought it was my last time.” The incident was also

captured on video which was played for the judge at trial. Fitzgerald testified in his

own defense, admitting that he pulled a gun on Blanco-Ortiz but explaining that he felt

threatened and pulled a weapon in self-defense.

Reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude

that the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to allow a rational trier of fact to

reject Fitzgerald’s claim of self-defense and find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt

of the crimes for which he was convicted. See OCGA § 16-5-21 (aggravated assault);

§ 16-11-106 (possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony).

Judgment affirmed. McFadden, P. J., and Hodges, J., concur.