SECOND DI VI SI ON

M I LLER, P. J.

, BROWN and GOSS, 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

Decem ber 13, 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 46 3 . J E NKINS v . J ENKINS. GS-0 5 4

G O S S , J u d g e.

W e gran t ed Dav i d J en ki ns ’ s ap pl i cat i o n fo r a d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal co n cern i n g

t h e e n t ry o f a 1 2 -m o n t h p ro t ect i v e o rd er ag ai n s t h i m as s o u g ht b y h i s d au g h t e r

M i ch el l e. J en k i n s arg u es t h at t h e t ri al co u rt ab u sed i t s d i s cret i o n wh en i t g ran t ed t h e

p ro t ect i v e o rd er b ecau s e t h e ev i d en ce d i d no t s h o w t h at he s t al k ed h is d au gh t er, t h at

h e p os ed an y d an g er t o h er, o r t h at sh e was i n reas o n ab l e fear fo r her s afet y

. W e fi n d

n o erro r an d affi rm

.

“ Th e g ran t o r d en i al o f a m o t i o n f o r a p r o t e ct i v e o rd er li es wi t h i n th e s o u n d

d i s cret i o n o f t h e t ri al co urt

, an d i t s deci si on o n s u ch a m o t i o n wi l l n o t b e rev ers ed

ab s en t an ab u s e of t h at d i s cret i o n

. ” (Ci t at i o n o m i t t ed .) Lewi s v. Lewi s

, 3 1 6 G a. Ap p.

6 7

, 6 8 (7 2 8 SE2 d 74 1 ) (2 0 12 ). “ A n ab u s e o f d i s cret io n occu rs wh ere a ru l i n g i su n s u pp o rt ed b y an y ev i d en ce o f reco rd o r wh ere t h at ru l i n g m i s s t at es o r m i s ap p li es

t h e rel ev an t l aw.” (Ci t at io n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Id

.

Th u s co ns t ru ed i n fav o r of t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s j u d gm en t, t h e reco rd s h ows t h at in

Au g u s t 2 0 1 7

, M i ch el l e s o u g ht a 1 2 -m o n t h ex t en s i o n o f a tem p o rary p ro t ect i v e o rd er

(TPO) ag ai n s t her fat h er o n t h e b as i s o f h is th reat en i ng t ex t m es s ag es

. Th e t ri al co u rt

d ecl i ned t o ex t en d t h e TPO at t h at t i m e b ecau s e Dav i d m i g h t h av e h ad a l eg i t i m at e

p u rp os e i n co n t act i n g M i ch el l e ab o u t h i s i m p en d i n g l aws u i t ag ai n s t h er, b ut warn ed

t h at “ t h ere’ s n o m ore l eg i t im at e p u rp o se fo r [co n tact ] t o b e go i n g b et ween t h e p art i es

wh en i t ’ s b een m ad e cl ear t hat i t ’ s u n wan t ed an d [t h at Dav i d ] w as haras s i n g

[M i ch el le] at t hi s p o i n t an d [s h e] fear[ed ] fo r [h er] s afet y an d [fel t] i n ti m i d at ed .”

In N o v e m

b er 20 1 7

, h owev er, Dav id b eg an s en di n g M ich el l e t ex t m es s ag es

referri n g t o M i ch el l e’ s p art n er as an “ ev il b i t ch ,” “ Sat an ,” a “ d em o n

, ” an d t he “ wo rs t

m o th er, ev er ev er i n f* ** i n g m an k i n d .” Ev en as h e ack n o wl ed g ed t h at hi s at t o rn ey s

h ad ad vi s ed h i m n ot t o co n t act M i ch el l e, Dav id di s o wn ed h er an d cu rs ed t h e co u p l e.

On No v em

b er 1 5, 2 0 1 7 , M i ch el l e o b t ai n ed an o th er ex p art e TPO i n s tru ct i ng Dav id

“ n o t t o h av e an y co n t act

, d irect

, i n d i rect

, o r t hro u g h an ot h er p ers o n [,] wi t h [M i ch el l e]

b y t el ep h o n e, fax , e-m ai l , o r an y o t h er m ean s o f co m

m u n i cat i o n [.] ”

2At s o m e p o i n t b efo re t h e en d o f t h e 2 0 1 7 Th an ks g iv i n g h o l i d ay (o n Su n d ay

,

No v em b er 2 6), d uri n g wh i ch h e was o u t of t o wn

, Dav id t ex t ed M i ch el l e t h at h e h ad

“ h ear[d ] t h ere’ s a p ro t ect i v e ord er s erv i ce w ai t i n g o n m e w h en I g et b ack t o At l an t a.”

Sh o rt l y aft erward

, Dav i d t ex t ed M i ch el l e t h at “ I d o b el i ev e d efi ni t el y t h at [M i ch el l e’ s

p art n er] i s g o i ng t o g et hers ” an d th at “ [s ] i nce y o u ’ re ru n n i n g wi t h t h e d ev i l , y o u’ l l

g et y ou rs

, t o o

. ” On t h e d ay aft er Th an k s g i v i n g

, M i ch el l e, wh o was i n Co l o rad o an d

t h u s “ fel t s afe cal l i n g h i m ,” cal l ed Dav i d

. H e res p on d ed by t ex t: “ I’ m d ru nk ; d o y o u

wan t t o t al k ? ” W h e n M i c h e l l e res p o nd ed t h at th ey co u ld t al k t h e fo ll o wi n g d ay

,

Dav id res p o n d ed : “ Ab o u t wh at

, t h e p ro t ect iv e ord er? Y o u h av e t o g et a p ro t ect i v e

o rd er ag ai n s t m e s o t hat I wo n ’ t h u rt y o u r fam i l y

. Yo u p ro b ab l y d o n ’ t wan t t o t al k to

m e. F* * * b o t h y o u m o t h erf* * * ers .”

At 1 : 2 5 p. m

. o n No v em

ber 2 7

, 2 0 1 7, D av i d was serv ed w i t h t h e ex p art e o rd er

i s su ed o n No v em

ber 1 5. El ev en m i n u t es l at er, Dav i d t ex ted M i ch el l e a p i ct u re o f t h e

o rd er. Dav i d s en t Mi ch el l e a n a d d i t io n al 6 tex t m es s ag es o n t h e fo l l o wi n g d ay

,

No v em b er 2 8. Mi ch el l e res p o n d ed t o o n e o f th es e m es s ag es

, t el l i n g Dav i d t h at t h ei r

rel at i o n s h i p en d ed “ wh en [h e] co n t i n u ed [h is ] v ici o u s an d h at efu l an d t h reat en i n g

ran t s

. ” Dav i d res p o n ded : “ F* * * o ff; I’ m d o n e wi t h y o u fo rev er.”

3On Decem b er 1 1

, 2 0 1 7

, a h e a r i n g w as h el d t o d et erm i ne w h et h er t h e TPO

s h o u ld b e ex t e n d e d fo r an ad d i t i o n al 1 2 m o n th s

. Dav i d was no t p res en t

, b u t was

rep res en t ed b y co u ns el

. A t t h e h eari n g

, M ich el l e t es t i fi ed t h at Dav i d h ad p h y s i cal l y

t h reat en ed h er i n Ap ri l 2 01 6

, t h at s h e w as i n fear fo r h er own an d her ch i l d ren ’ s

s afet y

, an d t h at s h e h ad s een Dav i d t ry t o h i t a g i rl fri en d wi t h a car i n M i ch el l e’ s

d ri v eway

, an d t h a t D a v i d h ad g rab b ed her s o n “ b y t h e n eck ” o v er th e p rev i ou s

Th an k s g i v i n g

. M i ch el le al s o p res en t ed ev i d en ce o f t h e m a n y t ex t m es s ag es Dav id

s en t i n No v em

b er 2 01 7

, i n cl u d i n g t h o s e s en t aft er Dav i d was s erv ed wi t h t h e ex p art e

No v em b er 1 5 o rd er. At t h e co n cl u s i o n o f t h e h eari n g

, t h e tri al co u rt g ran t ed t h e 1 2

-

m o nt h ex t en s i o n

.

W e g ran t ed Dav id ’ s ap p l i cat i o n fo r a d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal fro m t h at o rd er, an d

h e n o w a r g u e s t h at t he ev i d en ce b efo re t h e t ri al co u rt was i n s u ffi ci en t t o s h o w t h at

h e h ad st al k ed h is d au gh t er, t h at h e p o s ed a d an g er t o h er, or t h a t s h e was in

reas on ab l e fear fo r h er o r h er fam i l y ’ s s afet y . W e d i sag ree.

OCGA § 1 6 -5 -9 0 p ro v id es i n rel ev an t p art :

(a)(1 ) A p ers o n co m

m i t s t h e o ffen s e of s t al k i n g wh en h e o r sh e fo ll o ws

,

p l aces u n der s u rv ei l l an ce, o r co n t a ct s a n o t h er p er

so n at or ab o u t a p l ace

o r p l aces wi t h ou t t he co n s en t o f t h e o t her pers o n f o r t h e p u r

p o s e o f

h a r a s s in g a n d i n t imi da t i n g t h e o t h er p er s o n

. . . . [T] h e t erm

“ co n t act ”

4s h al l m ean an y co m m u n i c a t i o n i n cl u d i n g w i t ho u t b ei n g l im i t ed t o

co m m u n i cat io n i n p ers o n

, b

y t el ep h o ne

, b y m a i l

, b y b ro ad cas t

, b y

co m p ut er, by co m

p ut er n et w o r k

, o r b y an y o t h er el ect ro n i c d ev i ce

. . .

[T] h e t erm “ h aras s i n g an d i n t i m i d at i n g ” m ean s a k n o wi n g an d wi l l fu l

co u rs e o f co n d u ct d i rect ed at a s p eci fi c pers o n wh i ch cau s es em o t i o nal

d i s t res s b y p l a ci n g s u ch p er s o n i n r ea s on a b l e f

ea r f o r su ch p er

s o n’s

s a f et y o r t h e s a

f et y o f a memb e r o

f h i s o r h er immed i a t e f a mi l y, by

es t a bl i sh i ng a p a t t er n o

f h ar a s s i n g a n d i n ti mi d a t i n g b eh a vi o r

, a n d

wh i ch s er ves n o leg i t i ma t e p u r p os e

. Th i s Co d e s ect i o n s h al l n o t be

co n s t ru ed t o req u i re t h at an o v ert t h reat o f d eat h o r b o d i ly in ju ry h as

b een m ad e.

(Em p h as i s s u p p li ed .) OCGA § 1 6 -5 -9 1 p ro v i d es i n rel ev an t p art :

(a) A p ers on co m

m i t s t h e o ffen s e o f a g

g r a va t ed s t al ki ng wh en s u ch

p ers on

, i n vi o l a t i o n o

f a

. . . t emp o r ar

y p r o t ect i ve o r der

, p erm an en t

res t rai n i n g o rd er, p erm an en t p ro tect iv e o rd er, p rel i m i n a r y i n ju n ct i o n

,

g o o d b eh av i o r b on d

, o r p erm an en t i n j u n ct i o n

. . . p ro h ib i t i n g th e

be ha vior de sc r i be d in this subse c ti o n

, fo ll o ws

, p l aces u nd er s u rv ei l l an ce,

o r co n t a ct

s a n o t h er p er

s o n a t o r a b o u t a p l a c e o r pl a ces wi t h o u t th e

co n s en t o f t he o t her p er

s o n fo r t h e p u rp o s e o f h aras s i n g an d i n t i m i dat i n g

t h e o t her p ers on

.

(Em p h as i s s u p p li ed .)

Here, t h e ev i den ce s h o ws t h at al t h ou g h Dav i d was s erv ed wi t h t h e No v em b er

1 5 T PO, w h i ch b arred hi m fro m h av i n g an y co n t act wi t h M ich el l e, o n No vem b er 2 7,

5Dav id co n tact ed M ich el l e rep eat ed l y b y t ex t o n No vem b er 2 7 an d 28

. As we h av e

p rev i o u s l y n ot ed :

A d efen d an t n eed n o t en g ag e in u n eq u i v o cal l y h o s t i l e co n d u ct o r m ak e

ex p l ici t t h reat s i n o rd er t o b e co n v ict ed o f s t al k i ng

. E v en b eh av i o r t hat

i s n o t ov ert l y th reat en i n g can p ro vi d e t h e req u i s i t e d eg ree o f

i n t i m i d at i o n an d h aras s m en t i f i t is o n g o i n g

, rep et i t io u s, an d en g ag ed i n

d es p i t e t h e co m

m u ni cat ed wi s h es o f t h e v i ct i m

.

(Pu n ct u at i on an d fo o t n o t e o m i t t ed .) Pl a ca n i ca v. S ta t e

, 3 03 Ga. A p p

. 3 0 2, 3 0 4 (6 9 3

SE2 d 5 7 1) (2 0 1 0). Fu rt h er, “ ev en a s i n g l e v io lat i on o f a pro t ect i v e o rd er m ay v i o l at e

OCGA § 1 6-5 -9 1 (a) if t hat v i o l at i o n i s p art o f a p at t ern o f haras s i n g an d i n t i m i d at i n g

b eh av i o r.” (Ci t at i o n s an d pu n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed

. ) S l a ug h t er v. St a t e

, 3 2 7 Ga. Ap p

. 5 9 3,

5 9 6 (1 ) (a) (7 6 0 SE2 d 6 0 9 ) (2 0 1 4 ); s ee al s o Lo u i s yr v. S t a t e

, 3 0 7 Ga. Ap p

. 7 2 4

, 7 2 9

(1 ) (7 0 6 SE2 d 1 1 4 ) (2 0 11 ) (b ecau s e O C G A § 16 -5 -9 1 d o es n o t req u i re “ m u l t i p l e

v i o l at i o n s o f a p ro t ect i v e o rd er,” “ a p at tern o f h aras s i n g an d i n t i m id at i n g b eh av i o r”

c u l m i n at in g i n a si n g l e v i o l at io n o f a p ro t ect iv e o rd er was s u ffi ci en t t o s u s t ai n a

co n vi ct i o n fo r ag grav at ed s t al k in g ). T h e fact t h at M i ch el l e co n t act ed Dav i d at o n e o r

m o re p o i nt s aft er Dav i d ’ s fi rs t co n t act o n No v em b er 2 7 d o es no t affect o u r co n cl u s i o n

t h at t h is fi rs t co n t act was i n v i o l at i o n o f t h at o rd er. See Rever e v. S t a t e

, 2 7 7 Ga. Ap p.

3 9 3

, 3 94 (1 ) (a) (6 2 6 SE2 d 5 8 5) (2 0 0 6 ) (ev i d en ce su ffi ced t o s u s t ai n co n v i ct i o n fo r

6ag g rav at ed s t al k i n g ev en wh en a vi ct i m h ad prev i o u s l y c o n sen t ed t o d efen d an t ’ s

p res en ce o n t h e p rem i ses aft er t h e i ss u an ce o f a n o-co n t act o rd er).

Th e ev i d en ce b efo re t h e t ri al co urt al s o au t h o ri zed t h e co n cl u s i o n th at M i ch el l e

h ad p rev i o u s l y s een h er f

a th er en g ag e i n d o m es t i c v i o l en ce, i n cl ud i n g ag ai n s t h er s o n,

s u ch t h at h er fat h er’ s t h reat s p u t h er in reas o n ab le fear fo r h er o r her fam i l y ’ s s afet y

.

W e ar e n o t en t i tl ed t o s u b s t i t u t e o u r ju d g m en t fo r th e t ri al co u rt ’ s as to t h e wei g ht

g i v en t h i s o r o t h er ev i d en ce. See Lo u i s yr

, 3 0 7 Ga. Ap p

. a t 7 2 9 (1 ) (i n d et erm i n i n g

whet h er s t al k i n g o ccu rred

, a fact fi n der co u ld co n s id er “ a n u m b er o f fact ors

, i n cl u d i n g

t h e p ri o r h i s to ry b et ween t h e p art i es

, t h e d efen d an t ’ s s urrep t i t i o u s c o n d uct

, as wel l

as h i s o v ert l y co n fro n t at i o nal act s

, an d an y at t em p t s by t h e d efen dan t t o co n t act

,

co m m u n icat e wi t h

, o r co n t ro l t h e v i ct i m in d i rect l y ”) (fo o t n o t e s o m i t t ed ). Co m p are

Pi l ch er v. St r i b l i n g

, 2 8 2 Ga. 16 6

, 1 6 8 (6 4 7 SE2 d 8 ) (2 00 7 ) (v erb a l t a u n t s d u ri n g

wo rk i n g h o u rs were n o t su ffi ci en t

, t ak en al o n e, t o creat e reas o n ab le fear o n t h e p art

o f t h e v i ct i m s ).

Fo r al l t hes e reas o n s

, t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t ab u se i t s di s cret i o n wh en i t i s s u ed

t h e 1 2 -m o n t h p ro t ect i v e o rd er at i s s u e.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Mi l l er

, P. J., a n d

Br o wn , J., co n cu r

.

7