Woods v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Woods v. State

215 S.E.2d 734, 134 Ga. App. 726, 1975 Ga. App. LEXIS 2145

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 8, 1975

Docket50594

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 215 S.E.2d 734 (Woods 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

Woods v. State, 215 S.E.2d 734, 134 Ga. App. 726, 1975 Ga. App. LEXIS 2145 (Ga. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Deen, Presiding Judge.

The defendant, a prison inmate, was indicted and convicted of aggravated assault as a result of having attempted to stab a prison employee who was taking him to the hospital section because of a cut on his head from unknown causes. He had concealed a seven-inch pointed steel nail or spike on his person, and suddenly drew it out and attempted to stab the witness with it.

The defendant testified that he blacked out in his cell, fell, cut his forehead, and on being taken to the hospital again blacked out in the elevator and had no recollection of subsequent events. This was contradicted by a witness who said he was conscious and belligerent at all times. Whether he was being taken to the psychotic ward for mental or security reasons was an issue in the case which the jury decided against the contentions of the defendant that he had "blanked out” and had no intent to commit the act. It follows that the motion for new trial on the general grounds only was properly overruled. While this is not strictly speaking an "insanity defense,” it has some resemblance to the defense interposed in Ross v. State, 217 Ga. 569 (124 SE2d 280), where the defendant was in fact mentally abnormal, and where he contended he had no knowledge of what he was doing at the time of the attack. "However, mental abnormality is not a defense unless the accused was, at the time of the commission of the offense, mentally irresponsible under the test recognized by law in this State.” Id., p. 577. It is [727]*727obvious that the jury here did not believe the explanation of the defendant as to his state of mind.

Submitted April 29, 1975 Decided May 8, 1975. Carroll L. Cowart, for appellant. John IT. Underwood, District Attorney, Dupont K. Cheney, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Evans and Stolz, JJ., concur.

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

Deen, Presiding Judge.

The defendant, a prison inmate, was indicted and convicted of aggravated assault as a result of having attempted to stab a prison employee who was taking him to the hospital section because of a cut on his head from unknown causes. He had concealed a seven-inch pointed steel nail or spike on his person, and suddenly drew it out and attempted to stab the witness with it.

The defendant testified that he blacked out in his cell, fell, cut his forehead, and on being taken to the hospital again blacked out in the elevator and had no recollection of subsequent events. This was contradicted by a witness who said he was conscious and belligerent at all times. Whether he was being taken to the psychotic ward for mental or security reasons was an issue in the case which the jury decided against the contentions of the defendant that he had "blanked out” and had no intent to commit the act. It follows that the motion for new trial on the general grounds only was properly overruled. While this is not strictly speaking an "insanity defense,” it has some resemblance to the defense interposed in Ross v. State, 217 Ga. 569 (124 SE2d 280), where the defendant was in fact mentally abnormal, and where he contended he had no knowledge of what he was doing at the time of the attack. "However, mental abnormality is not a defense unless the accused was, at the time of the commission of the offense, mentally irresponsible under the test recognized by law in this State.” Id., p. 577. It is [727]*727obvious that the jury here did not believe the explanation of the defendant as to his state of mind.

Submitted April 29, 1975 Decided May 8, 1975. Carroll L. Cowart, for appellant. John IT. Underwood, District Attorney, Dupont K. Cheney, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Evans and Stolz, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 S.E.2d 734, 134 Ga. App. 726, 1975 Ga. App. LEXIS 2145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woods-v-state-gactapp-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack