SECOND DI VI SI ON

M I LLER, P. J.

, HODGES and PI PKI N, 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.

https ://w w w

. ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s

D E A D LIN E S A R E N O LO N G E R TO LLE D IN T

H I S

C O U R T. A LL FILIN G S M U ST B E S U B M I TTE D WITH IN

TH E TIM E S S E T B Y

O U R C O U R T R U LE S

.

Nov em ber 12, 2021



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A2 1 A1 71 2 . ECHOLS v . THE STATE.

M I LLE R , Pres i d i n g J u d g e.

A M u s co g ee Co u n t y ju ry fo u n d M o s es L ee Ech ol s g u i lt y o f ro bb ery by

i n t i m i d at i o n , ag grav at ed as s au l t

, an d ag g rav at ed b at t ery

. Ech o l s ap p eal s f r o m t h e

ju d g m en t o f co n v ict i o n an d t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d en i al o f h i s m o ti o n fo r n ew tri al

, arg u i n g

t h at t h e ev i d en ce was i n su ffi ci en t t o su p p o rt t h e co n v i ct i o n s fo r ag g rav at ed as s au l t

an d ag g rav at ed b a t t e r y

. W e co n cl u d e t h at t h e ev id en ce was s u ffi ci en t o n b o th

ch arg es , an d we t herefo re affi rm

.

On ap peal fro m a cri m i n al co n v i ct io n , we vi ew t h e ev i den ce i n t h e l i g h t

m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e verd i ct

, wi th th e d ef e n d a n t n o lo n g er en

jo y in g a

p res um p t i o n of in no cen ce. W e n ei th er wei g h th e ev id en ce n o r ju d g e th e

cred ib i l i t y o f wi tn es s es , b u t d et erm in e on l y wh et h er, aft er v i ewi n g th e

ev i d en ce i n t he l ig h t m os t fav o rab l e t o t he p ro s ecu ti o n , an y rat i o n al tri ero f fact co ul d h av e fo u n d t h e es s en t i al el em en t s o f t h e cri m e b ey o n d a

reas o n ab l e d o u b t

.

(Ci t at i o n s an d p un ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) S o l o mo n v. S t a t e , 34 2 Ga. Ap p

. 83 6 (8 0 5 SE2 d

2 9 3 ) (2 0 1 7 ).

So v iewed

, t h e ev i d en ce ad d u ced at t ri al s ho ws t hat Terri M cDo u g al d -Ho ward

was ro m an ti cal l y i n v o lv ed w i t h Ech o l s b efo re t h e rel at i o n s h ip d et eri o rat ed

, an d t h ey

ev en tu al l y s ep arat ed aro u n d 20 1 6

. On an ev e n i n g i n Ju n e 2 01 8

, wh i le Ech o l s an d

Ho ward were at Ech ol s’ ap art m en t

, Ech o l s s aw cert ai n pi ct u res o n Ho ward ’ s p h o n e

an d to l d h er t h at s h e was “ g o i n g t o p ay fo r i t .” Ech o l s pl aced Ho ward o n h i s b ed

, s at

o n h er, an d b eg an b eat i n g h er i n t h e face w i t h h i s fi s t an d s t ri k i n g h e r i n h er u p p er

b o d y , ch es t , h ead

, ears , an d n o s e. Ho ward rep eat ed l y as k ed Ech o l s t o “ l et [h er] u p ”

an d t o g et o ff o f h er. Sh e co u l d n o t b reat h e o r s ee, an d b l o o d w as ru n n i n g d o wn h er

t h ro at

.

Aft er t h e at t ack

, Ho ward ’ s face was “ s w o l l en as t ro n o m i cal l y ,” h er l i p was

s w o l l en , an d s h e k ep t s p it t i n g u p b l o od

. H oward al s o tes t ifi ed t hat her n o s e w a s

b ro k en

. Ho ward ev en t u al ly w en t t o h e r c a r , aft er wh ich Ech o ls o rd ered h er t o g i v e

h i m a m on ey o rd er wh i ch s h e h ad p u rch as ed an d t hreat en e d t o “ p u t [ h er] h ead

t h ro u g h t h e wi n d s h i el d o r t h ro u g h t h e d o o r” i f sh e d i d n o t co m p l y

. H o ward g av e

2Ech ol s t h e m o n ey o rd er, l eft h i s h o m e, an d ev en t u al l y wen t t o t h e em erg en cy ro o m

b y am b u l an ce. Th e res p o n d i n g o ffi cer d is co v ered d ri ed b lo o d o n E ch o l s ’ h an d an d

b l o o d s pl at t ers t h ro u g h o u t h i s h o m e, i n cl u d in g on t h e b l ad e of a k n i fe i n t h e k i t ch en

.

Ech ol s t o l d t h e o ffi cer t h at t h e b l o o d o n t h e k n i fe was d u e t o a cu t o n h i s fi n g er. At

t ri al

, ph o t o g rap h s o f H o w ard ’ s i n ju ri es were en t ered i n t o ev i d en ce an d p u b l i s h ed to

t h e ju ry

. Am o ng t hes e w as a p i ct u re s h o wi n g an o p en l acerat i o n o n Ho w ard ’ s t h ro at

.

Ech o l s was i n di ct ed fo r ro b b e r y b y i n t i m i d at i o n, ag g rav at ed as s au l t (fam i l y

v i o l en ce), an d ag g rav at ed b at t ery (fam i l y v i o len ce). Th e ju ry fo u n d E ch o l s g u i l t y o n

al l th ree c o u n ts

, an d t h e t ri al co u rt s en t en ced h i m t o 2 5 y ears , t o s erv e 1 3 in

co n fi n em en t

. Ech o l s fi l ed a m o t i o n fo r new t ri al

, wh i ch t he t ri al co u rt d en i ed aft er a

h eari n g . Th i s ap p eal en s u ed

.

1

. Fi rs t

, E ch o l s arg u es t h a t t h e ev i d en ce was i n su ffi ci en t t o s u p p o rt t h e

c onvic tion f

or a ggr a va te d a ssa

ult be c a use the ci rcu m s t an t i al ev i d en ce was in s u ffi c ie nt

t o p ro v e t h at a k n i fe was u s e d d u ri n g t h e as sau l t

, as ch arg ed in th e i n d i ct m en t

. W e

co n cl u d e t h at t h e ev i d en ce was s u ffi ci en t

.

“ A p ers o n co m

m i ts t h e o ffen s e o f ag g rav at ed as s au l t wh en h e o r s h e as s au l t s

. . . [w ]i t h a d ead l y weap o n or wi t h an y o b j ect

, d ev i ce, or i n s t ru m en t wh i ch

, wh en

3u s ed o ffen s i vel y ag ai n s t a p ers on , i s l ik el y t o o r act u al l y d oes res u l t i n s eri ou s b o d i l y

i n ju ry [.] ” OCGA § 1 6 -5 -2 1 (a) (2 ).

Th e p res en ce o f a dead l y weap on o r t h e ap p eara n c e o f s u ch m ay be

es t ab l i sh ed b y ci rcu m s t an t i al ev i d en ce, an d a co n v i ct i o n fo r ag g rav at ed

as s au l t m ay b e s u s t ai n ed ev en t h o ug h t h e w eap o n was n ei t her s een n o r

accu rat el y d es cri b ed b y t h e v i ct i m

. So m e p h y si cal m an i fes t at i on i s

req u ired o r so m e ev i d en ce fro m wh i ch t h e p res en ce o f a weap o n m ay be

i n ferred

, b u t OC G A § 1 6 -5 -2 1 (a) d o es n o t req u i re pro o f o f an act ual

d ead l y w eap o n

. It i s cl ear t h at ev en i n t h e ab s en ce o f th e p ro d uct i o n o r

v erb al d es cri p t i o n o f t h e weap o n us ed

, ev i d en ce as t o t h e n at u re , k i n d

an d l o cat i o n o f t he wo u n d s i n fl i c t e d b y th e as s ai l an t i s s uffi ci en t t o

al l o w t h e ju ry

t o i nfer t h e ch aract er o f t he weap o n.

(Ci t at i o n s an d p un ct u at i on o m i t t ed .) La t t i mer v. S t a t e , 2 3 1 Ga. Ap p

. 5 9 4 (4 9 9 SE2 d

6 7 1 ) (1 9 9 8 ).

Here, al t h o u g h Ho ward d i d n o t t es t i fy t o s eei n g Ech o l s wi t h a kn i fe, t h e

res p o n d in g o ffi cer ret ri ev ed a k n i fe i n Ech o l s ’ k i t ch en , wh i ch b o re bl o o d o n b o th

s i des o f t he b l ad e, an d t h e j u ry al s o s aw ph o t o g rap h i c ev i d en ce o f an o p en l acerat i o n

o n Ho w ard ’ s t h r o at

. G i v en t h e n at u re o f t h e wo u n d o n Ho ward ’ s t h ro at an d t h e

p res en ce o f b lo od o n t h e k n i fe, t h e ju ry co u ld h av e in ferred t h at Ech o ls as s au l t ed

Ho ward wi t h t he kn i fe. See Ta l l ey v

. S t a t e , 2 0 9 Ga. A p p

. 79

, 7 9 -8 0 (3 ) (4 3 2 SE2 d

6 6 7 ) (1 9 9 3 ) (ev i d en ce was su ffi ci en t t o fi nd th e d efen d an t g u i l t y o f ag g rav at ed

4as s au l t wi t h “ a s h arp -ed g ed ob j ect ” w h ere t h e vi ct i m d i d n o t see th e d efen d an t wi th

a weap o n d u ri n g t h e at t ack b ut “ fel t a s t i n g i n g s en s at i o n an d n o t i ced b l o o d co m i n g

fro m h i s n eck ”); Za ch er

y v

. S ta t e , 1 5 3 Ga. Ap p

. 53 1

, 53 1 -5 3 2 (1 ) (2 6 5 SE2 d 8 6 0 )

(1 9 8 0) (ev i d en ce was su ffi ci en t t o fi n d t h e d efen d an t gu i l t y o f as sau l t i n g t h e v i ct i m

wi t h a “ s h arp i n s t ru m en t ” wh ere t h e v i ct im di d n o t s ee an y weap o n b u t t es t i fi ed t h at

s h e s u ffered an ab ra s i o n , cu t

, an d p u nct u re wo u n d

, an d t he i n v es t i g at i n g o ffi cer

t es t i fi ed t o o b s erv i n g a “ l arg e s t ab wo u n d” o n t h e vi ct i m ’ s sh o u l d er). Acco rd i n g l y ,

t h e ev i d en ce was s uffi ci en t t o s u p p o rt t h e co n v i ct i o n fo r ag g rav at ed as s au l t

.

2

. Nex t

, Ech o ls arg ues t h at t he ev i d en ce was i n s u ffi ci en t t o s u p p o rt t h e

co n vi ct i o n fo r ag g rav at ed b at tery b ecau s e How a r d’ s te st i m o n y al on e d i d n o t es t ab l i s h

t h at h e i n ju red h er n o s e so as to ren d er i t u s el es s , as p ro scri b ed b y OCGA § 1 6 -5 -2 4.

W e d i s ag ree wi t h t hi s as s ert i o n.

“ A p ers o n co m

m i t s t h e o ffen se o f ag g rav at ed b at t ery w h en h e o r s h e

m al i ci ou s l y cau s es b od i l y h arm t o an o th er b y d ep ri v i n g h i m o r h er o f a m em b er o f h i s

o r her b od y , b y ren d eri n g a m em b er o f h i s o r h er b o d y u s el es s , o r b y s e r i o u s l y

d i s fi g u ri n g h i s o r h er b od y o r a m em b er t hereo f.” OCGA § 1 6 -5 -2 4 (a). “ ‘ Dep ri v i n g ’

t h e v i ct i m o f a m em

b er o f h er b o d y m ay refer t o t h e l o ss o f t h e u s e o f t h e m em b er.”

(Ci t at i o n o m i t t ed .) Jo n es v. S t a t e , 2 8 3 Ga. Ap p. 6 3 1

, 6 33 (1 ) (6 4 2 SE2 d 3 31 ) (2 0 0 7 ).

5F urt h er, “ v i ct i m s are co m p et en t t o t es t i fy as t o t he i n ju ri es t h ey s u ffered d u ri n g a n

as s au l t

, i n cl ud in g b r o k e n b o n es .” (Ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Pu l l i a m v.

S t a t e , 30 9 Ga. Ap p. 4 7 7

, 4 7 8 -4 7 9 (1 ) (7 1 1 SE2 d 2 1 ) (2 0 1 1 ); s ee al s o Jo n es v. S t a t e ,

2 9 4 Ga. Ap p

. 56 4

, 5 6 6 -5 6 7 (2 ) (6 6 9 SE2 d 50 5 ) (2 0 0 8 ) (v i ct i m co u l d t es t i fy t h at h er

jaw was bro k en w i t ho u t a ph y si ci an ’ s t es ti m o n y ); Jo nes , su p ra, 2 8 3 Ga. Ap p

. at 6 3 3

(1 ) (m ed ical t es ti m on y n o t req u i red t o es t ab l i s h t h e v i ct i m ’ s l o s s of u s e o f her n o s e).

T h e i n d i ct m en t i n t h i s cas e al l eg ed t h at Ech o l s m al i ci o us l y cau s ed h arm t o

Ho ward “ b y d ep ri v i n g [h er] o f h er n o s e.

. . .” H o w a r d t es t i fi ed t h at her n o s e was

b ro k en an d t h at s h e co u l d n ot b reat h e t h ro ug h h er n o s e aft er Ech o l s at t ack ed h er. Sh e

al s o ex pl ai n ed t h at a m ed i cal p ro ced u re i s req u i red t o rep ai r her n o s e an d t h at b ecau s e

s h e h ad n o t u n derg o n e t h e p ro ced u re, h er n o s e wi l l “ b e l i k e t h at p erm an en t [l y ] .” Th i s

ev i d en ce was s u ffi ci en t t o s u pp o rt a fi n d i n g t h at Ho ward was d ep ri v ed o f h er n o s e.

See, e.g ., Jo n es , s u p ra, 2 8 3 G a. Ap p

. at 6 3 3 (1 ) (ev i den ce w as s u ffi ci en t t o fi n d t h at

t h e v i ct i m was d ep ri v ed o f h e r n o s e w h ere s h e h ad a d rai n ag e p ro b lem an d b l o o d

l eak ag e fro m h er n o s e aft er t h e at t ack

, an d s h e t es t i fi ed at t ri al t hat h er n o s e was s t i l l

n o t “ al l t he w ay ”); Ga n a s v. S t a t e , 2 45 G a

. A p p

. 6 4 5

, 6 4 7 (1 ) (c) (5 3 7 SE2 d 7 5 8 )

(2 0 0 0) (v i ct i m was d ep ri v ed of a m em b er of h er b od y wh ere t h e d efen dan t b ro k e h er

6fi ng er d u ri n g t h e at tack ). Th erefo re, th e ev i d en ce was su ffi ci en t t o fi n d Ech ol s g ui l t y

o f ag g rav at ed b at t ery

.

Gi v en t he fo reg o i n g , w e affi rm t h e ju d g m en t o f co n v i ct io n an d t h e t ri al co urt ’ s

d en ial o f Ech o l s ’ m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Ho d

g es a n d Pi p ki n , JJ., co ncu r

.

7