FOURTH D I VI SI ON

ELLI NGTON, P. J.

, BRA N CH and M ERCI ER, 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

Septem b er 8, 2016



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 6 A0 82 9 . FREY v . THE STATE.

B R A N C H , J u d g e.

Co ry Ray Frey ap peal s fro m h i s co n v i ct i o n o f ars o n, cri m in al d am ag e t o a

res i den ce an d a J eep , an d as sau l t

, a s w e l l a s 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

.

Frey co n t en d s t h at t h e t ri al co u rt i m p ro p erl y co m

m en t ed on t h e ev i d en ce, t h at t h e

S t a t e fai led to pro ve cri m in al d am ag e t o th e J eep , an d t h at t h e co u rt erred b y

s en t en ci n g h i m as a reci d i v i s t

. Fo r t h e reas on s t h at fo l l o w, we rev ers e Frey ’ s

co n vi ct i o n o f cri m i n al d am ag e t o t h e J eep b u t affi rm Frey ’ s rem ai n i ng co nv i ct i o n s

.

“ On cri m i n al ap p eal

, ap p el l an t i s no l o n g er p res um ed i n n o cen t an d al l o f t h e

ev i d en ce i s t o b e vi ewed i n t h e l i g h t m o s t fav o ra b l e t o t he ju ry v erd i ct

. T h i s Co u rt

d o es n ot reco ns i der ev id en ce o r at t em p t to c o n f

i rm t h e accu racy o f t es t i m o n y

.

As s e s s i n g a wi t n es s ’ s cred i bi l i t y is t h e res p o n s i b il i t y of t h e fact fi n d er, n o t t h i sCo u rt .” Ba t t en v. S t a t e , 2 9 5 Ga. 4 4 2

, 4 4 3 (1 ) (7 6 1 SE2 d 7 0 ) (2 01 4 ) (ci t a t i o n s

o m it t ed ). In s t ead

, we rev i ew t h e cas e “ to d et erm i n e i f th e ev i d en ce, wh en v i ewed in

t h e l i g ht m os t fav orab l e t o t h e p ro s ecu t io n , s up p o rt s t h e v erd i ct

. ” W il l is v. S t a t e , 2 6 3

Ga

. 5 9 7

, 5 9 8 (4 3 6 SE2 d 2 0 4) (1 9 9 3 ), ci t i ng Ja cks o n v. Vi r g i ni a , 4 4 3 U. S. 3 0 7 (9 9

SCt 2 7 8 1

, 6 1 LEd 2 d 5 6 0 ) (1 9 7 9 ). Up o n rev i ew o f t h e s u ffi ci en cy o f t h e ev i d en ce,

“ t h e rel ev an t q ues ti o n i s w h et h er, aft er v i ewi n g t h e ev i d e n c e i n t h e l i g h t m o s t

fav o rab l e t o t h e pro secu t i o n , a ny rat io n al tri er of fact co u l d h av e fo u nd t h e es s en t i al

el em en t s o f t h e cri m e bey o n d a reas o n ab l e d o ub t .” Ru s s u v. S t a t e , 32 1 Ga. Ap p

. 6 9 5,

6 9 6 (1 ) (7 4 2 SE2 d 5 1 1 ) (2 0 1 3 ) (p u n ct u at i o n an d fo o t n o t e om i t t ed ; em p h as i s in

o ri g i nal ).

Co n st ru ed in fav o r o f t h e v erd i ct

, t h e e v i d e n ce s h o ws th at Frey in t en t i o n al l y

s t art ed a fi re o n th e p o rch o f a res i d en ce l o cat ed at 2 28 W es t Sp ri n g St reet

, To cco a,

i n St ep h en s Co u n t y , wh i ch was o wn ed by Den i s e J ack s o n an d occu p i ed b y h er so n

at t h e t im e o f t h e fi re. Th e res i d en ce was i n s u red b y S o u t h e r n Gen eral In s u ran ce

Co m p an y

. Lat er, Frey at t ack ed a J eep Ch ero k ee p ark ed n earb y wi t h a s t i ck

, cau s i n g

d am ag e in cl ud i n g b ro k en wi n d o ws , ap p aren tl y b ecau se h e t h o u g h t t h at t h e J eep

o wn ers h ad rep o rt e d t h e a r s o n t o t h e p o l i ce. Frey al s o t h reat en ed t o s tri k e M i ch ael

Harri s o n , wh o s aw Frey

at t ack t h e J eep , wi t h a l arg e s t i ck

.

2Frey was ch arg ed o n t h ree co un t s o f ars o n (fo r d i fferen t w ay s o f co m m i t t i n g

t h e s am e ars o n ), t h ree co un t s of cri m i n al dam ag e t o p ro p ert y (o n e co u n t fo r t h e h o u s e

an d t wo fo r t h e Jeep 1 ), an d s i m p l e as s au l t

. He was co n v i ct ed o n al l co u n t s , an d t h e

t r i a l c o u r t m e r ged t wo o f t h e co u n t s o f ars on an d o n e co un t o f cri m i n al d am ag e to

p ro p ert y i n t o t h e fi rs t co u n t o f ars o n

. Th e co u rt s en t en ced Frey t o 2 0 y ears fo r ars o n

(Co un t 1 ), as wel l as 5 y ears fo r d am ag i n g t h e J eep an d 1 2 m o n t h s fo r as s au l t , wi th

t h es e sen t en ces t o b e s erv ed co n cu rren t l y wi t h Co u n t 1. In a d et ai l ed o rd er, t h e t ri al

co u rt d en i ed Frey ’ s m o t io n fo r n ew t ri al

.

1

. Frey fi rs t co n t en d s t h e t ri al co u rt i m p ro p erl y co m

m en ted o n th e ev i d en ce.

W e d i s ag ree.

At t h e t im e o f Frey ’ s t ri al , OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 7 p ro v i ded :

It i s erro r fo r an y ju d g e i n an y cri m in al cas e, d u ri ng i t s p ro g res s

o r i n h i s ch arg e t o t h e ju ry , t o ex p res s or in t i m at e h i s o p i n i o n as to wh at

h as o r h as no t b een pro v ed or as to t h e g ui lt o f t h e accu s ed

. Sh o ul d an y ju d g e v i o l at e t hi s Co d e s ect io n , t he v io l at i o n s h al l b e h el d

. . . t o b e erro r

an d t h e d eci s i o n i n t h e cas e rev ers ed

, an d a n ew t ri al gran t ed in th e co u rt

b el o w

.

1 On e of t h e t wo co u n t s i n v o l v i n g t h e J eep was d u p l i cat i v e a n d l a t er n o l l e

p ro s s ed

.

3See Ga. L. 2 0 1 5

, p

. 10 5 0

, § 1 (effect i v e J u ly 1

, 2 0 1 5 )

. “ To co n s t i t u t e an i m p ro p er

co m m en t u n der OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 7

, t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s s t at em en t m u s t ex p res s an o p i n i o n

ab o ut wh et h er t h e ev i d en ce h ad p ro v en a m at eri al i ss u e i n t h e cas e, w h et her a wi t n es s

was cred ib l e, o r wh et h er t h e d efen d an t was g u i l t y .” An t h o n y v. S t at e , 2 8 2 Ga. Ap p.

4 5 7

, 4 5 8 (1 ) (6 3 8 SE2 d 8 7 7 ) (2 0 0 6 ) (ci t at io n s an d p u n ct u at io n o m i t t ed ). “ On ap p eal

,

t h e i s s u e i s s i m

p l y w h et h er t h e r e w as s uch a v i o l at i on .” S t at e v. Ga r d ner , 2 8 6 Ga.

6 3 3 , 6 3 4 (6 9 0 SE2 d 16 4 ) (2 0 1 0 ).

OCGA § 1 6 -7 -6 0 (a) (3 ) p ro v i d es t hat o n e way a p ers o n can co m

m i t ars o n i s

b y bu rn i n g a d w el l i n g h o us e “ wh en s u ch is i ns u red ag ai n s t lo s s o r d am ag e b y fi re o r

ex p lo s i v e an d s u ch l o s s o r d am ag e i s acco m p l i s h ed wi th o u t t h e co n s en t o f b o t h t h e

i n s u rer an d t h e i n s ured .” In at t em p t i n g t o p ro v e t h at So u t h ern Gen eral d i d n o t co n s en t

t o th e b urn i n g of th e s u b j ect p ro p ert y , t h e St at e q u es t i o n ed an in v es ti g at o r fo r

So u t hern Gen eral

. Frey co n t en d s t h at d uri n g t h is q u es t i o ni n g , t he co u rt im p ro p erl y

s u g g es t ed t h at t h e i n s u ran ce co m p an y h ad n o t co n s en t ed t o t he fi re:

Q: An d are y ou aware o f t h e fi re d am ag e t h at was cau sed t o t hat

d wel l i n g b ack o n J u n e 2 4 t h o f 2 0 0 8 ?

A: I am . Yes

. Q: Di d So u t h ern Gen eral co n s en t o r ag ree t o t hat fi re dam ag e t hat

o ccu rred ?

A: Th ey d i d

.

4Q: Yo ur i n s u ran ce co m p an y ag reed t o t h e fi re l o s s ?

A: Yes

. Q: Let m e res t at e m

y q u es t i o n

. THE COURT: I t h i n k we h ad a fai l u re t o co m m u n i cat e.

PROSECUTOR: M y

fau l t.

Q: Di d So u t h ern Gen eral g i v e p erm i s s i o n t o an y b o d y t o b u rn t hat

d wel l i n g ?

A: No

, t h ey

d i d n o t

. Q: Bu t y o u ag ree t h ere was a fi re l o s s t o t h at d wel l i n g ?

A: Yes . W e d i d u n d ers t an d t h at

. Q: Di d y o u r co m

p an y , So u t h ern Gen eral

, g i ve p erm i s s i o n t o Co ry
Frey t o b u rn t h at d wel l i n g ?

A: No

, we d i d n ot

.

W e fi nd n o v i o l at i o n. Th e co u rt m erel y co m m en t ed o n t h e o b v i o u s co n fu s i o n

b et ween t h e p ro s ecu t o r an d t h e wi t n es s reg ard in g th e i n s u rer’ s d eci s i o n to co v er t h e

l o s s as o p p o s ed t o wh et h er t h e i n s u rer co n s en t ed t o t h e fi re. Th e co urt t herefo re d id

n o t g i ve an o p in i o n as t o wh at had o r h ad no t been p ro v ed

. See Ga r d n er , 2 8 6 Ga. at

6 3 5 (co u rt d i d n o t v i o lat e OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 7 b y as k i n g St at e wh et h e r i t h a d p ro v en

v en ue); Owen s v. S t a t e , 2 7 1 Ga. Ap p

. 3 6 5

, 3 7 1 (5 ) (c) (i ) (6 09 SE2 d 6 7 0) (2 0 0 5 ) (“ A

co u rt ’ s ad m o n i t i o n t o co rrect a m i s l ead i n g q u es t i o n b y co u n s el d o es n o t ri s e t o t h e

l ev el o f an ex p res s i o n o r i n ti m at i o n o f o p i n i o n b y t h e ju d g e as t o m at t ers p ro v ed o r

g u i l t o f t h e accu s ed .”) (ci t at i o n , p u n ct u at i o n an d fo o t n ot e o m i t t ed ).

52

. Frey co n t en ds t h e ev i d en ce o f cri m i nal d am ag e to p ro p e r t y i n t he s eco n d

d eg ree was in s u ffi ci e n t b e c a u s e t h e St at e fai l ed to p ro v e th at dam ag e t o t h e J eep

ex ceed ed $ 5 0 0

. See OCGA § 1 6 -7 -2 3 (a) (1 ) (“ A p ers o n co m m i t s t h e o ffen s e o f

cri m i n al d am ag e t o p ro p ert y i n t h e s eco n d d eg ree wh en h e: (1 ) In ten t i o n al ly d am ag es

an y p ro p ert y o f an o t h er pers o n wi t h ou t h i s co n s en t an d t h e d am ag e t h eret o ex ceed s

$ 5 0 0 .0 0 .”).

Al t h ou g h t h e i nd i ct m en t al l eg ed t h at Frey h ad d am ag ed a J eep Ch ero k ee, t h e

v i ct i m t es t i fi ed t h at Frey al so d am ag ed h er G M C pi ck u p t ru ck

. A f t er th e co u rt

p ro h ib i t ed t h e S tat e fro m i n t ro d u ci n g ev i d en ce reg ard i n g d am ag e t o t h e GM C, t h e

p ro s ecu to r as k ed ab o u t d am ag es as fo l l ows :

Q: An d i s t h e d am ag e h e cau s ed m ore t h an $ 5 0 0 ?

A: Y e s

. I t was $ 3 0 0 t o g et t h e w i n d s h i el d s pu t in an d t h e s id e

g l as s i n t h e J eep an d we co u l d n ’ t af f o r d t o g et th e cam

p er p art o f th e

t ru ck fi x ed

. Q: W as t here al s o d am ag e d o n e t o t h e b o d y o f t h e v eh icl e?

A: Yes

, s i r. T h e m i rro rs were k n o ck ed o u t an d t h ere w as (i nau d ib l e).

In res p on s e t o th e fi rs t q ues ti on , wh et h er s h e ag reed th e dam ag e ex ceed ed $ 5 0 0

, t h e

v i ct i m cl earl y tes t ifi ed ab o u t b o t h t h e J eep an d t h e t ru ck

. W h i l e d i s cu s s i n g t h e $ 3 0 0

am ou n t o f d am ag es , s he d id so i n referen ce t o m o re t h an o n e wi n d s h i el d

, wh i ch

6s u g g es t s s h e w as tal k i n g ab o u t t h e fro n t g l as s i n b ot h v eh i cl es

. H er l at er referen ce to

t h e J eep ’ s “ s id e gl as s ” co n fi rm s t h is co n cl u si o n

. Th us t h e St at e fai l ed t o s ho w t h at t h e

$ 3 0 0 was s p en t o n l y o n t h e J eep

. An d ev en co n s t ru i n g th e s e c o n d q u e s t i o n as

p ert ai n i n g on l y to t h e J eep , t h e v i ct i m fai l ed to pl ace a m o n et ary v al u e o n t he co s t o f

rep l aci ng t h e m i rro rs

. Th u s , th e St at e fai l ed t o p ro ve t h at Frey cau s ed a t l e as t $ 5 0 0

o f d am ag e t o t he J eep as ch arg ed i n t h e i n di ct m en t an d t h erefo re fai l ed t o p ro v e t h at

Frey co m m i tt ed cri m i n al d am ag e t o p ers o n al p ro p ert y i n th e s eco n d d eg ree wi th

reg ard t o t h e J eep

. See OCGA § 1 6 -7 -2 3 (a) (1 ). Th u s , h i s co n v i ct i o n fo r t h i s cri m e

m u st b e rev ers ed

.

3

. Frey al s o co n t en d s t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y s en t en ci ng h i m as a reci d i v i s t

.

W h et h er a defen d an t was p ro p erl y s en t en ced as a reci d i vi s t u n d er OCGA § 1 7 -1 0 -7

i s s u b j e c t t o d e n o v o rev i ew. Ma t h i s v. S t a t e , 3 3 6 Ga. Ap p

. 2 5 7 (7 8 4 SE2 d 9 8 )

(2 0 1 6).

Pri o r t o t ri al , t h e St at e g av e n ot i ce o f i n t en t t o s eek s en t en ci n g as a reci d i v i s t

an d t o us e Frey ’ s p ri o r co n v i ct i o n s i n ag grav at i o n o f h i s p u n is hm en t

. Th e St at e l i s t ed

ei g h t pri o r co n v i ct i o n s fro m o u t s i d e of Geo rg i a an d o n e fro m i n si d e o f Geo rg i a i n t h e

n o t i ce, an d i t p ro v i d e d cert ifi ed co p i es o f t h es e p ri or co n v i ct i o n s t o Frey

. At t h e

s en t en ci n g h eari n g , t h e St at e rei t erat ed i t s i n t en t t o seek reci d i v i s t p un i s hm en t an d to

7u s e th e p ri or c o n v i c t i o n s i n ag g rav at i o n

. Th e St at e t en d ered t h e cert i fi ed co p i es o f

s ev en p ri o r co n v i ct i on s , si x fro m ei t h er N eb ras k a o r Oh i o , an d on e fro m No rt h

Caro l i n a. Frey o b

ject ed t o t h e co n v i ct i o n fro m No rt h Caro l i n a, an d t he co u rt refu s ed

t o al l o w t h e St at e t o i n t ro d u ce t h at d o cu m en t

. Th e St a t e t h e n req u es t ed reci d i v i s t

s en t en ci n g , an d Frey res p o nd ed b y arg u i n g t h a t t h e d o cu m en t s ten d ered fro m

Neb ras ka an d Oh i o di d n o t p ro v i d e “ a b as i s ” to sen t en ce Frey as a reci di v i s t

. W i t h o ut

co m m en t i n g o n t h e o b

j ect i o n , t h e co u rt t h en s en t en ced Frey

.

On ap p eal

, Frey arg u es t h at t h e co u rt erred b y s en ten ci n g h i m a s a reci d i v i s t

b ecau s e th e St at e fai l ed t o s h o w t h at h e was p rev i o u sl y “ s en t en ced t o co n fi nem en t in

a p en al i n s t i t u ti o n ” as a res u l t o f a Geo rg ia fel o n y o r co n d u ct i n an o t h er s t at e t h at

wo u l d h av e b een a fel o n y h ad it o ccu rred in Geo rg i a. OCGA § 17 -1 0 -7 (a). 2 He al s o

2 OCGA § 1 7 -1 0-7 (a) p ro v i d es as fo l l o ws :
Ex cep t as o t h erwi s e p ro v i d ed i n s u b s ect i o n (b ) o r (b

. 1 ) o f t h i s

Co d e s ect i o n , an y p ers o n wh o , aft er h av in g b een co n v i ct ed o f a fel o n y

o ffe n s e i n th i s st at e o r hav i n g b een co n v i ct ed u n d er th e laws o f an y

o t h er s t at e o r o f t h e Un i t ed St at es o f a cri m e wh i ch if co m m i t t ed wi t h i n

t h i s s t at e wo u l d b e a fel o n y an d s en ten ced t o co n fi n em en t i n a p en al

i n s t i t u t i o n , co m

m i t s a fel o n y p u ni s h ab l e b y co n fi nem en t i n a p en al

i n s t i t u t i o n s h al l b e s en t en ced t o u n d e rg o t h e lo n g es t p eri o d o f t i m e

p res cri b ed fo r t h e p u ni s hm en t o f t h e s u bs eq u en t o ffen s e of wh i ch h e o r

s h e st an d s co n v i ct ed

, p ro v i d ed t hat

, un l es s o t h erwi s e p ro vi d ed b y l aw,

t h e t ri al ju d g e m ay , i n h i s o r h er di s cret io n , p ro b at e o r su s pen d t he

m ax i m u m s en t en ce p res cri b ed fo r t h e o ffen s e.

8co n ten d s t h at t h e ju ry was req ui red to d et erm i n e wh et h er h e h ad b een s o s en t en ced

i n t h e pas t

. Bu t Frey d i d n ot rai s e t h es e arg um en t s at sen t en ci ng

. “ To b e rev i ewab l e

o n ap p eal

, an o b

ject i o n m u st cl earl y d i rect t h e at t en t i o n o f t h e t ri al co u rt t o t h e

cl ai m ed erro r an d m

u s t b e s t at ed w i t h s u ffi ci en t p art i cu l ari t y to l eav e n o d o u b t as to

t h e s p eci fi c g ro u n d u p o n wh i ch t h e ch arg e i s ch al l en g ed .” Th r a s h v. Ra hn , 2 4 9 Ga.

Ap p

. 3 5 1

, 3 5 3 (4 ) (5 4 7 SE2 d 6 9 4) (2 0 0 1) (ci t at i o n an d fo o t n o t e o m i t t ed ). An d an

o b ject i on reg a r d i ng t h e ex is t en ce o r v al id i t y of pri o r co n v i ct io ns as a bas i s fo r

reci di v i s t p u n i s h m en t can b e w ai v ed i n t h e t ri al co u rt

. vo n Th o ma s v. S t a te

, 2 9 3 Ga.

5 6 9

, 5 7 3 (2 ) (7 4 8 SE2 d 4 46 ) (2 0 1 3 ). Becau s e Frey d i d n o t o b j ect b el o w o n t h e

g ro u nd s h e n ow at t em

p t s t o rai s e o n ap p eal

, h e h as wai v ed ap pel l at e rev i ew o f t h es e

i s su es

. See, e.g ., Th o ma s v. S ta t e , 3 0 5 Ga. Ap p

. 8 0 1

, 8 0 3 (2 ) (7 0 1 SE2 d 2 02 ) (2 0 1 0 )

(fai l u re t o ch al l en g e at s en ten c i n g a p art i cu l ar co n vi ct i o n o ffered as a b as i s fo r

s en t en ci n g u nd er t h e reci d i v i s t s t at u t e, w ai v es th at i s s u e o n ap p eal ); Za ch er y v. S t a t e ,

2 4 1 Ga. Ap p . 7 2 2 , 7 2 3 (2 ) (5 27 SE2 d 6 0 1 ) (2 0 0 0) (ap p el l an t wai ved arg u m en t t h at

“ t ri al co urt erred in d eci d in g t h e reci d iv i s m co un t i t s el f rat h er t h an s en di n g i t t o t h e

ju ry ” b y fai l i ng t o o b

ject o n t h at g ro u nd at s en t en ci n g ).

Ju d g men t a f f i rmed i n p a r t a nd r ever

s ed i n p a r t

. E ll i n g t o n

, P. J., an d M er ci er

,

J., co n cu r

.

9