Opinion ID: 1175465
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Question by the Jurors[2]

Text: The court instructed the jury as follows: The difference between attempted aggravated assault and aggravated assault is that in the latter the commission of the crime succeeded and in the former the defendant did not succeed because the acts which he put in motion were interrupted. During the jurors' deliberation, they submitted a question to the court asking, does `succeeded' mean successful at inflicting physical harm or can it mean successful at putting the girls in reasonable apprehension of immediate physical injury? The judge responded: Both counsel are here and I have read them an answer which I think is appropriate.... The answer to your question is that succeeded in the fulfillment of the crime of aggravated assault can be either the infliction of physical harm or putting the girls in reasonable apprehension of immediate physical injury. ..... Gentlemen, do you think that is an appropriate answer? MR. TUCKER: Yes, I do. MR. SHEPERD: Yes, Your honor. THE COURT: We have agreed. I will send that answer back to the jury. Thank you. Defendant argues that the trial court's response not only failed to clarify the situation, but aggravated the existing problem. We disagree. Also, we note that defendant made no objection to the instruction. We find no error.