Whitehead v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Whitehead v. State

287 S.E.2d 648, 160 Ga. App. 644, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 3123

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 4, 1981

Docket63006

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 287 S.E.2d 648 (Whitehead 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

Whitehead v. State, 287 S.E.2d 648, 160 Ga. App. 644, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 3123 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Banke, Judge.

The defendant was convicted of three counts of public indecency on evidence that he exposed his sexual organ to three young girls. He enumerates as error the denial of his motion for directed verdict. His motion before the trial court set forth no supporting grounds and was unaccompanied by argument. Held:

A directed verdict of acquittal is permitted “where there is no conflict in the evidence, and the evidence introduced, with all reasonable deductions and inferences therefrom, shall demand a verdict of acquittal or ‘not guilty. . .’ ” Code Ann. § 27-1802 (a).

The state’s evidence shows that on three separate occasions the defendant approached young girls, ages 10-11, called them over to his car, and attracted their attention to his exposed penis. The defendant was positively identified by the victims both at pre-trial lineup and at trial. The evidence was sufficient to support conviction; therefore, denial of his motion for directed verdict was not error. See McCane v. State, 147 Ga. App. 730 (3) (250 SE2d 181) (1978). Defendant’s argument that the conduct described above is not a crime within the meanjng of the statute is completely without merit. “ ‘Whether an act is dectent or indecent depends upon the time, the place, and all the circumstances surrounding its commission, including the intention, actual or implied, of the actor.’ ” Key v. State, 131 Ga. App. 126, 127 (205 SE2d 510) (1974).

Judgment affírmed.

Deen, P. J., and Carley, J., concur. *645 Decided December 4, 1981. Guy B. Scott, for appellant. Joseph H. Briley, District Attorney, Alberto C. Martinez, Jr., Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

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

Banke, Judge.

The defendant was convicted of three counts of public indecency on evidence that he exposed his sexual organ to three young girls. He enumerates as error the denial of his motion for directed verdict. His motion before the trial court set forth no supporting grounds and was unaccompanied by argument. Held:

A directed verdict of acquittal is permitted “where there is no conflict in the evidence, and the evidence introduced, with all reasonable deductions and inferences therefrom, shall demand a verdict of acquittal or ‘not guilty. . .’ ” Code Ann. § 27-1802 (a).

The state’s evidence shows that on three separate occasions the defendant approached young girls, ages 10-11, called them over to his car, and attracted their attention to his exposed penis. The defendant was positively identified by the victims both at pre-trial lineup and at trial. The evidence was sufficient to support conviction; therefore, denial of his motion for directed verdict was not error. See McCane v. State, 147 Ga. App. 730 (3) (250 SE2d 181) (1978). Defendant’s argument that the conduct described above is not a crime within the meanjng of the statute is completely without merit. “ ‘Whether an act is dectent or indecent depends upon the time, the place, and all the circumstances surrounding its commission, including the intention, actual or implied, of the actor.’ ” Key v. State, 131 Ga. App. 126, 127 (205 SE2d 510) (1974).

Judgment affírmed.

Deen, P. J., and Carley, J., concur. *645 Decided December 4, 1981. Guy B. Scott, for appellant. Joseph H. Briley, District Attorney, Alberto C. Martinez, Jr., Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

287 S.E.2d 648, 160 Ga. App. 644, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 3123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whitehead-v-state-gactapp-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack