NYANE v. State

703 S.E.2d 53, 306 Ga. App. 591, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 3555, 2010 Ga. App. LEXIS 1008
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedOctober 27, 2010
DocketA10A0940
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 703 S.E.2d 53 (NYANE 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
NYANE v. State, 703 S.E.2d 53, 306 Ga. App. 591, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 3555, 2010 Ga. App. LEXIS 1008 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinion

Miller, Chief Judge.

A Madison County jury convicted Ousman Nyane of single counts each of attempted armed robbery (OCGA § 16-4-1), aggravated assault (OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (1)), possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime (OCGA § 16-11-106 (b) (1)), and possession of tools for the commission of a crime (OCGA § 16-7-20). 1 Nyane appeals, contending that the trial court erred (i) in denying his motion for directed verdict of acquittal; (ii) in denying his motion for mistrial; and (iii) in admitting a still video image into evidence. Nyane also claims his trial counsel was ineffective. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm in part and reverse in part.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict (Drammeh v. State, 285 Ga. App. 545, 546 (1) (646 SE2d 742) (2007)), the evidence shows that in the early morning hours of September 23, 2007, Jedone Meadows was working at the Golden Pantry when two men entered the store, one of whom was Nyane. Armed with a gun and wearing a hood, Nyane demanded money from the safe and asked where it was located. Meadows told Nyane that he did not have access to the safe, but he would open the cash register for him. After Meadows opened the cash register, a struggle ensued between the two. Meadows attempted to disarm Nyane because he thought he “was going to get shot” and feared for his life. During the struggle, Nyane’s gun discharged twice, the shots striking Meadows in the chest and leg. Nyane and the other male fled the store, leaving behind a cell phone. Meadows testified that Nyane was wearing body armor at the time and did not appear to be fazed when he struck him. The cell phone was later determined to belong to Corrie Norman. Meadows identified his assailant as the shorter male with the gun and the hood.

Captain Michael Benner of the Madison County Sheriffs Department investigated the incident and learned that Nyane might be found at an apartment in Lithonia. When the officer went to the apartment with an arrest warrant for Nyane’s arrest and knocked on the door, he was met by Tracie Watson, who advised that Nyane was not there but she knew him. During a search of a bedroom closet, body armor was found on the floor. According to Captain Benner, Nyane later stated that he received a handgun and body armor from Corrie Norman the weekend of the robbery. At trial, the State introduced into evidence a CD of the store video, a still photograph *592 and a still image taken from the store’s video, and body armor.

1. Nyane contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict of acquittal. We find no error with respect to Nyane’s convictions of attempted armed robbery, aggravated assault and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, but find that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction of possession of tools for the commission of a crime.

The standard of review for the denial of a motion for directed verdict of acquittal is the same as that for reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction. We must determine whether after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to support the verdict, any rational trier of fact could have found the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

(Citation, punctuation and footnote omitted.) Garrett v. State, 263 Ga. App. 310 (587 SE2d 794) (2003).

Given Meadows’s eyewitness testimony that Nyane approached him with a handgun while attempting to obtain money from the cash register, the evidence was sufficient to authorize Nyane’s convictions for attempted armed robbery and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. See Ferguson v. State, 225 Ga. App. 490, 491 (1) (484 SE2d 296) (1997) (victim’s testimony identifying defendant as the man who threatened his life and demanded his wallet supported conviction for criminal attempt to commit armed robbery) and OCGA §§ 16-4-1; 16-11-106 (b) (1), respectively. There also was ample evidence of Nyane’s guilt of aggravated assault based on Nyane’s act of firing two shots in the victim’s direction, wounding him in the chest and leg. Johnson v. State, 190 Ga. App. 172, 173 (378 SE2d 700) (1989) (shots fired by defendant at the victim supported aggravated assault conviction); OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (1).

The evidence, however, was insufficient to support Nyane’s conviction of possession of tools for the commission of a crime for lack of evidence showing that body armor is a tool commonly used in the commission of attempted armed robbery. See OCGA § 16-7-20 (a); see also Garrett, supra, 263 Ga. App. at 312 (two-by-four is not a tool commonly used in the commission of a burglary or theft). Thus, we reverse Nyane’s conviction of possession of tools for the commission of a crime.

2. Nyane argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for mistrial after Captain Benner violated the trial court’s ruling on his motion in limine when he testified that Nyane admitted his involvement in another incident. We are not persuaded.

We review a trial court’s denial of a motion for mistrial for an *593 abuse of discretion. Underwood v. State, 218 Ga. App. 530, 534 (3) (462 SE2d 434) (1995).

The trial court granted Nyane’s motion in limine to exclude any evidence of his admitted involvement in another criminal matter occurring in Elbert County. During cross-examination of Captain Benner, defense counsel inquired about Nyane’s statement and whether Nyane denied committing the attempted armed robbery. Captain Benner replied, “Yes, he did. He admitted to other — to another incident in another county.” Defense counsel then moved for a mistrial, which the trial court denied sub silentio, stating “he came close, but he caught himself.” Thereafter, defense counsel did not ask for a curative instruction and Captain Benner made no further mention of any other incidents involving Nyane. We find no error in the trial court’s denial of Nyane’s motion for mistrial as the officer’s testimony referred to another incident and not another crime per se. Nor has Nyane shown that a mistrial was essential to preserve his right to a fair trial. See Chezem v. State, 199 Ga. App. 869, 872 (4) (406 SE2d 522) (1991) (where defendant failed to demonstrate that a mistrial “was essential to preservation of a defendant’s right to a fair trial, it is not an abuse of discretion to deny a motion for mistrial even where no curative instructions were given”) (citation and punctuation omitted).

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

Related

GARNER v. the STATE.
816 S.E.2d 368 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2018)
Issa v. the State
796 S.E.2d 726 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2017)
Kenemer v. the State
765 S.E.2d 21 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2014)
Dennis Touchstone v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012
Touchstone v. State
735 S.E.2d 805 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
703 S.E.2d 53, 306 Ga. App. 591, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 3555, 2010 Ga. App. LEXIS 1008, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nyane-v-state-gactapp-2010.