DESAUSSURE v. STATE

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

46221.

Attorney(S)

Blackburn, Bright, Edwards Joseph, J. Converse Bright, for appellant. H. Lamar Cole, District Attorney, Michael J. Bowers, Attorney General, Leonora Grant, for appellee.

Judges

CLARKE, Presiding Justice.

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

The appellant was convicted of the murder of Abraham Wilson and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. The crimes occurred on April 5, 1986. The appellant was indicted on May 4, 1987, and subsequently tried and convicted on May 4, 1988, receiving a life sentence plus a term of five years. A motion for new trial was denied on July 29, 1988. The notice of appeal was filed on August 25, 1988, with the appeal docketed and submitted for opinion in the Supreme Court of Georgia later that year.

The evidence showed that the appellant and the victim, who were cousins, had previously participated in a bank robbery in New York. The victim had threatened the appellant’s mother and failed to provide the appellant with his share of the robbery proceeds. The murder occurred at the victim’s home in Lowndes County, Georgia, where the victim, appellant, and three other guests from New York had gathered to plan another bank robbery. Two of the appellant’s companions, convicted bank robbers, testified against him. Although not eyewitnesses to the murder, they were outside the house at the time and heard the gunshot. One witness saw the victim’s body when they returned to the house. The appellant later indicated to two witnesses that he had killed the victim and gave one a .25 caliber gun to dispose of, which was the weapon used in the murder.

Legal Issues Presented

Whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support the appellant's conviction for murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime.
Whether discrepancies in the testimony of the witnesses who were convicted bank robbers undermined the credibility of their testimony and thus the sufficiency of the evidence.

Arguments of the Parties

Appellant's Arguments

The appellant argued that due to discrepancies in the witnesses' stories, there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict.
The appellant asserted an alibi defense, claiming he was not at the victim’s house and that another person must have committed the murder.
The appellant challenged the credibility of the witnesses, noting that they were convicted bank robbers.

State's Arguments

This information was not available in the provided opinion.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent	Rule or Principle Cited For	Application by the Court
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979)	Standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence to sustain a criminal conviction.	The court applied the Jackson standard to determine that the evidence was sufficient to convince any rational trier of fact of the appellant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court analyzed the evidence in light of the appellant’s arguments regarding discrepancies in witness testimony and their credibility. It found that the appellant did not demonstrate any material contradictions in the witnesses’ stories. The jury was entitled to assess the credibility of the witnesses, including the fact that they were convicted bank robbers. Applying the Jackson v. Virginia standard, the court concluded that the evidence was sufficient to establish the appellant’s guilt of murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

Holding and Implications

Judgment affirmed.

The court upheld the appellant’s convictions and sentences. The direct effect of this decision is the affirmation of the appellant’s life sentence and additional term for firearm possession. The opinion does not establish new precedent beyond confirming the sufficiency of evidence under the Jackson standard.

Show full summary ...

DESAUSSURE v. THE STATE.

CLARKE, Presiding Justice.

Appellant was convicted of the murder of Abraham Wilson and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime and sentenced to life imprisonment and a term of years.

The crimes occurred April 5, 1986. Appellant was indicted May 4, 1987. He was tried and convicted of murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime on May 4, 1988, and sentenced to life imprisonment and a term of five years on May 4, 1988. A motion for new trial was denied July 29, 1988. The notice of appeal was filed August 25, 1988. On September 14, 1988, the transcript was certified. The appeal was docketed in this court on September 19, 1988, and submitted for opinion November 4, 1988.

The evidence at trial showed that appellant and victim, who were cousins, had participated in a bank robbery in New York and that the victim had threatened appellant's mother and had failed to give him his fair share of the robbery proceeds. Appellant killed the victim at the victim's home in Lowndes County, Georgia, where the victim, appellant, and three house guests from New York had gathered to plan a robbery of the Farmer's Bank in Pavo, Georgia. Two of appellant's companions from New York, who have been convicted of bank robbery, testified against him at trial. Although they were not eyewitnesses to the murder, they knew that appellant was inside with the victim. These witnesses were outside the house and heard the gunshot. One witness testified that they went back to the victim's house to retrieve some property and saw his body. Later the appellant indicated to two of them that he had killed the victim. He gave a .25 caliber gun to one of these witnesses to dispose of it. The victim was killed with a .25 caliber gun.

Appellant contends that because of discrepancies in their stories there was not enough evidence against him to support the verdict. His defense was alibi. He contended that he was not at the victim's house and that one of the others must have killed him. Appellant also contends that they were convicted bank robbers and that their testimony was not credible for that reason. Appellant has not shown how the stories were contradictory in any material way. The jury was entitled to pass on the credibility of these witnesses.

We find the evidence sufficient to convince any rational trier of fact of the appellant's guilt of every essential element of the crimes of murder and possession of a firearm under the standard of Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 ( 99 S.C. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560) (1979).

Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.