THI RD DI VI SI ON

ELLI NGTON, P. J.

, BETHEL and GOBEI L, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a l s .us /r ule s

A u gust 8, 2018



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 8 A1 14 1 . W ILLIAM S v . THE STATE.

E LLI N G T O N , Pres i d i n g J ud g e.

A H en ry Co u n ty ju ry fo u n d Kh ary W i l l i am s g u i l t y b ey o nd a reas o nab l e d o u bt

o f fo u r co u n ts o f ag g rav at ed as s au l t

, OCGA § 1 6 -5 -2 1 (a) (2 ) (wi th a d ead l y weap o n ).

Fo l l o wi ng t h e d en i al o f h i s m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al

, W i l li am s ap p eal s

, ch al l en g i n g t h e

s u ffi ci en cy o f t h e ev i d en ce d i s p ro v i n g h i s affi rm at i v e d efen s e o f ju s t i fi cat io n

. Fo r t h e

reas on s p ro v i d ed b el o w, we affi rm

.

Vi ewed i n t h e l i g h t m o st fav orab l e t o t h e ju ry ’ s v erd i ct

, 1 th e ev i d en ce s h o wed

t h e fo l l owi n g

. Fo r ab o u t a y ear p reced i n g t h e i n ci d en t at i s su e, W il l i am s l i v ed wi th

1 Ja cks o n v. Vi r

g i n i a

, 44 3 U. S. 3 0 7, 31 9 (III) (B) (9 9 SCt 2 7 8 1

, 6 1 LE2 d 5 6 0 )

(1 9 7 9).h i s fi an cée an d h er fo u r ch i ld ren i n Hen ry Co u n t y

. W i l l i am s was u n em p lo y ed an d h i s

fi an cée p ai d t h e h o u s eh ol d b il l s

.

On M ay 1 4

, 2 0 1 4

, W il l i am s ’ fi an cée dro v e W i l l i am s aro un d t o wn i n s earch fo r

em pl o y m en t

. At h om e t h at ev en i n g

, th ey arg ued ab o u t W i l l i am s ’ refu s al t o ap p l y fo r

p o s i t i on s at al l b u t o n e o f th e b u s i n es s es th ey v i s i t e d t h at d ay

. W i l li am s’ fi an cée

as s ert ed th at s h e h ad cau g h t W i l l i am s l y i ng ab o u t p u t t i n g i n a jo b ap p l i cat i o n at Pap a

J o h n s. As t h e arg u m en t es cal at ed

, W i l l i am s fo rcefu l l y t ri ed to r e m ove the e nga ge m e nt

ri ng fro m h i s fi an cée’ s fi n g er. Rel en t i n g, s h e rem o v ed th e ri ng h ers el f, an d

, aft er s h e

h an ded i t t o W i l l i am s, h e p ro ceed ed t o t hro w t h e ri ng i n t o th e y ard

. W i ll i am s ’ fi an cée

t h en d em an d ed t h at W i ll i am s l eav e h er h o us e.

Du ri n g t h e al t ercat i on

, t h ree of t h e fi an cée’ s ch i l d ren were wal k i n g h o m e fro m

t h e bu s s t o p

. As t h e ch i l d ren arri v ed at t h e h o us e, W i l l i am s ’ fi an cée t o l d t h em t o g et

i n t he car an d t o s t a y t h ere b ecau s e t h ey were ab ou t t o leav e. Sh e th en l eft t h e

ch i l d ren i n t h e car p ark ed i n t h e g arag e an d m ad e a s eco n d at t em p t at dem an d i n g t h at

W i ll i am s l eav e h er h o u se.

W i l l i am s wal k ed away f

r om his f ia n cée an d w en t in to th ei r b ed ro o m

. W i l l i am s ’

fi an cée h eard a g u n co ck an d t h en W i l li am s wal ked b ack t o ward s her wi t h h i s h an d s

b eh in d h i s b ack

. Feari n g fo r h er l i fe, s h e ran b ack t o t h e g arag e an d cran k ed t h e car.

2As s h e p u t t h e car i nt o rev ers e, s h e h eard g u n s h o t s

. Sh e fran ti cal l y b ack ed o u t o f t h e

g arag e, h i t a t ree, an d m o m en tari l y b l ack ed o u t. Aft er s he reg ai n ed co ns ci o us ne s s

, s h e

d ro v e t o a n ei g h b o r’ s h ou se fo r h el p

.

As a res u lt o f t he sh o o ti n g

, W il l i am s’ fi an cée su s t ai n ed a bu l l et wo u n d t o h er

ab d om en wh i ch req ui red t h at h er co lo n b e rep ai red

. Her s o n s u ffered a b u ll et wo u n d

t o h i s fi n gers

. W i l l i am s’ fi an cée an d h er s o n b o t h h av e co nt i n u i ng i s s ues ari s i n g fro m

t h ei r i n ju ri es

.

W i l l i am s ad m i t t ed t o i n v es t i g at o rs t h at he s h o t at t h e car o ccu pi ed b y t h e fo u r

v i ct i m s u n t i l t he gu n was em p t y an d t h at h e t h en t h rew t he g u n at t h e d ri v er’ s s i d e

wi n do w o f t h e car wi t h s uch fo rce t h at t h e g u n b ro k e th ro u gh th e wi n d o w an d l an d ed

i n t h e f r o n t seat

. Acco rd i n g t o W i l l i am s

, he wal k ed t o t he g arag e an d t h e sh o o t i n g

“ ju s t h a p p e n e d

. ” W i l l iam s al s o s t at ed t h at h e was afrai d o f h i s fi an cée an d t h at s h e

t ri ed to h i t h i m

wi t h t h e car.

W i l l i am s co n t en d s t h at th e St at e fai l ed t o d i sp ro v e h i s affi rm at iv e d efen s e o f

ju s t ifi cat i o n

. Sp eci fi cal l y

, h e arg u es t h at t h e ev i d en ce p res en t ed at tri al s h o wed t h at

h i s fi an cée was at t em

p t i n g t o ru n h im

o ver wi t h h er car an d t hat t h e s h oo t i n g was a

ju s t ifi ab l e act o f s el f defen s e. W i l l i am s as s e r t s t h at t h i s w as s u ffi ci en t t o rai s e a

3reas on ab l e d o u b t

, an d t h u s, t h e s t an d ard fo r a cri m i n al co n vi ct i o n was n o t m et i n t h e

p res en t cas e. 2

On ap p eal fro m a cri m i nal co n v i ct i o n

,

[t he ap p el l at e co u rt ] v i ew[s ] th e ev i d en ce in t he li g h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o

t h e v erd i ct [,] an d an ap p el l an t n o l o n ger en j o ys t h e p res u m

p t io n o f

i n n o cen s e. [Th e ap p el l a t e co u rt ] d et erm i nes wh et h er t h e ev i d en ce i s

s u ffi ci en t u n der t h e s t an dard o f Ja cks o n v. V ir gi n i a

, 4 4 3 U

. S

. 3 0 7 (9 9

SCt 2 7 8 1

, 6 1 L E2 d 5 6 0 ) (1 9 79 ) an d d o es n o t wei g h t h e ev i d en ce o r

d et erm i ne w i t nes s cred i b i l i ty

. An y co n fl i ct s o r i n co n s is t en ci es i n th e

ev i d en ce are fo r t h e ju ry t o res o l v e. As l o n g as th ere i s s o m e co m p et en t

ev i d en ce, ev en t h o u g h co n t rad i ct ed

, t o s u p p o rt each fact n e ces s ary t o

m ak e o u t th e St at e’ s cas e, [t h e ap pel l at e co u rt ] m u s t u p ho l d t h e j u ry ’ s

v erd ict

.

( C i t at io n s om i t t ed .) Ra n ki n v. S t at e

, 2 7 8 Ga. 7 0 4

, 7 05 (6 0 6 SE2 d 2 6 9 ) (2 0 0 4 )

. I n

p art i cu l ar, th e q ues ti o n of ju s t i fi cat i on i s a m at t er fo r t h e ju ry

, an d t h e ap p el lat e co u rt

2 See OCGA § 1 6-1 -3 (1 ) (“ ‘ Affi rm at i v e d efen se” m ean s

, wi t h res p ect t o an y

affi rm at i v e d efen s e au t h o ri zed i n [t h e Cri m es an d Offen s es Co d e]

, u n l es s t h e s t at e’ s

ev i d en ce rai s es t h e i s s u e i n vo k i n g t h e al l eg ed d e f en s e, t h e d efen d an t m

u s t p res en t

ev i d en ce t h ereo n t o rai s e t h e i s s u e.”); Ba co n v. S t a t e, 2 4 9 Ga. Ap p

. 3 4 7

, 3 4 9 (1 ) (b )

(5 4 8 SE2 D 7 8) (2 0 0 1 ) (An affi rm at i v e d efen s e i s a defen s e t h at ad m i t s t h e d o i n g o f

t h e act ch arg ed “ b u t s eek s to ju st i fy, e x c u s e o r m i t i g at e i t

. W i t h an affi rm at i v e

d efen s e, t h e fo cu s n o l o ng er beco m es t he act

, i t s el f, s i n ce s u ch i s ad m it ted

. In s t ead

,

t h e St at e’ s bu rd en b eco m es t h e i n t ro d u ct i o n o f ev i d en ce th a t d i s p u t es

, i

. e.,

‘ di s pro v es

, ’ t h e defen d an t’ s al l eg ed ju s t i fi cat io n /ex cu s e fo r t h e act .”) (p u nct u a t i o n

an d fo ot n o t es o m i t t ed ).

4d efers t o t h e ju ry ’ s as s es s m en t o f t h e wei gh t an d cred i bi l i t y o f t h e ev id en ce wh en a

d efen d an t rel i es o n t hi s affi rm at i v e defen s e. Mo s l ey v. S t a t e

, 3 0 0 Ga. 5 2 1

, 5 2 4 (1 )

(7 9 6 SE2 d 6 8 4 ) (2 0 1 7); Gl en n v. S t a t e

, 2 9 6 G a. 5 0 9

, 5 1 1 (1 ) (7 6 9 SE2 d 2 91 ) (2 0 1 5 ).

Un d er OCGA § 1 6 -3 -2 0 (a) (1 ), “ Th e fact t h at a p ers o n ’ s co n d u ct i s ju s t i fi ed

i s a d efen s e t o p ro s e c u t i o n fo r an y cri m e b as ed on th at co n du ct

. Th e d efen s e o f

ju s t ifi cat i o n can b e cl ai m ed [, i n t er al i a

, ] [ w ]h e n t h e p ers o n ’ s co nd u ct i s ju s t i fi ed

u n d er [OCGA § ] 1 6 -3 -2 1 [.] ” OCGA § 1 6 -3 -2 1 (a) p ro vi d es th at

, ex cep t as o t h erwi s e

p ro v id ed

, “ [a] pers o n i s ju s ti fi ed i n t h reat en i ng o r u s i n g fo rce ag ai n s t an o t h er wh en

an d to t h e ex t en t t h at h e o r sh e reas o nab l y b el iev es t h at su ch t h reat o r fo rce i s

n eces s ary t o d efen d h i m s el f o r h ers el f or a t h i rd p ers o n ag ai n s t s u ch o th er’ s i m m i n en t

u s e of u n l awfu l fo rce[.] ” Th e ev i d en ce ad d uced at t ri al i n t h i s cas e au t h o ri zed t h e ju ry

t o fi nd th at W i ll i am s i n t en t i o n al l y fi red a g u n at h i s fi an cée an d h er t h ree ch i l d ren as

t h ey were si t ti n g in hi s fi an cée’ s car. “ Del i b erat el y fi ri n g a g u n in t h e d i rect i o n o f

an o th er p ers o n co ns t it u t es ag g rav at ed as s au l t

. ” (Ci t at i o n s an d pu n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed .)

Ho wa r d v. S t a t e , 2 8 8 Ga. 7 4 1

, 7 4 3 (1 ) (7 07 SE2 d 8 0 ) (2 0 1 1). 3 T h e ju ry was free to

3 U n d er OCGA § 16 -5 -2 1 (b ) (2 ), “ [a] p ers o n co m m i t s t h e o ffen s e o f

ag g rav at ed as s au l t wh en he o r s h e as s au l t s wi t h a d ead l y weap o n o r wi t h an y o b ject

, d ev ice, o r i n st ru m en t wh i ch

, wh en u s ed o ffen s i v el y ag ai n s t a pers o n

, i s l ik el y t o o r

act u al l y d o es res u l t i n s eri o u s b o d i l y i n ju ry .” See OCGA § 16 -5 -2 0 (a) (“ A p ers o n

co m m i t s t h e o ffen s e o f s i m

pl e as s au lt wh en h e o r s he ei t h er: (1 ) At t em p t s to co m

m i t

5reject W i l l i am s ’ v ers i o n of t h e ev en t s

, t h at i s

, t h at h e was afrai d o f h i s fi an cée an d s h e

was t ry i n g t o ru n o v er h i m

, an d t h e g u i l t y v erd i ct s sh o w t h at t h e ju ry d id n o t fi n d h i s

fi ri n g o f t h e g u n at t h e o ccu p i ed car t o b e ju s t i fi ed

. Mo s l ey v. S t a t e, 3 0 0 Ga. at 5 2 4

(1 ); Gl en n v. S t a t e

, 2 9 6 Ga. at 5 1 1 (1 ). 4 Acco rd i n g l y

, t he t ri al co u rt di d no t err in

d et erm i n i n g t h at t he St at e carri ed i t s b u rd en o f i n t ro d u ci n g ev i den ce t h at d i s p ro v ed

W i ll i am s ’ al l eg ed ju s t ifi cat i o n fo r h i s u s e o f d ead l y fo rce an d t h at t h e ev i d en ce was

s u ffi ci en t t o su pp o rt h i s co n v i ct i o n s fo r ag g rav at ed as s au lt

. H o wa r d v. S t at e

, 2 8 8 Ga.

at 7 4 3 (1 ) (fi ri n g a g u n to ward a cro wd i n a p a rk i n g lo t ); Bi s h o p v. S t a t e

, 2 6 6 Ga.

Ap p

. 12 9

, 13 0 (1 ) (5 9 6 SE2 d 6 7 4 ) (2 0 0 4 ) (fi ri n g a g u n i n t o a t ru ck o ccu pi ed b y t wo

p eo pl e); Pa r

ker v. St at e

, 2 3 4 Ga. Ap p

. 1 3 7

, 1 38 (5 0 5 SE2 d 7 8 4 ) (1 9 9 8 ) (fi ri n g a g u n

i n t o a car o ccu p i ed b y

fo u r p eo p l e).

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Bet h el a n d

Go b ei l , JJ., co n cu r

.

a v i o l en t i n

ju ry t o t h e pers o n of an o t h er; o r (2 ) Co m m i t s an act wh i ch p l aces an o t h er

i n reas o n ab l e ap p reh en s i o n o f i m m ed i at el y recei v i ng a v io l en t i n

ju ry .”).

4 See Ja cks o n v. S t a t e

, 3 2 9 Ga. Ap p. 2 4 0

, 2 4 2 (3 ), n

. 4 (7 6 4 SE2 d 5 69 ) (2 0 1 4 )

(A d efen d an t m ay as s ert ju s t ifi cat i o n i n an y i n s tan ce “ wh i ch s t an ds u p o n t h e s am e

fo o t i ng o f reas on an d j u s t i ce as ” t h e g ro un d s s p eci fi cal l y s et o u t i n t h e s t at u t e.) (ci t i n g

OCGA § 1 6 -3 -2 0 (6 )).

6