SMITH v. THE STATE

Supreme Court of Georgia1998-11-09No. S98A0672

270 Ga. 123508 S.E.2d 173

Summary · law.co

Holding. The court affirmed Smith's convictions for malice murder and aggravated assault, finding the evidence sufficient to support the verdicts and rejecting his challenge to the admissibility of prior threatening statements.

Clarence Smith was convicted of malice murder and aggravated assault stemming from an attack on his ex-girlfriend's apartment in June 1996. Smith forced his way into the residence and shot his ex-girlfriend's new boyfriend eleven times with a handgun, then physically assaulted his ex-girlfriend by striking her with the pistol and kicking her, causing serious head and side injuries. Smith fled the scene, was found hiding later that day, and surrendered to police after threatening suicide.

On appeal, Smith challenged the sufficiency of evidence and the admissibility of prior threats he had made to kill both victims. The court found the evidence legally sufficient to support the convictions and rejected Smith's argument that certain threatening statements should have been excluded. The court determined that procedural rules requiring notice and a hearing did not apply to evidence of prior disagreements between the defendant and victims, as established in controlling precedent.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Sufficiency of evidence for malice murder and aggravated assault convictions
Admissibility of prior threats and 'prior difficulties' evidence without procedural notice and hearing requirements
Applicability of procedural rules to evidence of statements made before the crimes

Procedural posture

Smith appealed his jury convictions for malice murder and aggravated assault entered after trial in June 1997, with his case docketed in the appellate court in January 1998 and submitted for decision without oral argument.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

majority opinion

Hines, Justice.

Clarence V. Smith appeals his convictions and sentences for malice murder and aggravated assault. For the reasons which follow, we affirm.

Smith dated Tomeca Stevenson from 1994 until January 1996. Two to three months after ending her relationship with Smith, Stevenson began dating Caleb Walls. During a telephone conversation with Stevenson, approximately one to two weeks before the crimes occurred, Smith threatened to kill both Stevenson and Walls.

In the early morning hours of June 1,1996, Stevenson and Walls finished work, went to the grocery store and returned to Stevenson’s apartment about 2:00 a.m. Stevenson and Walls went to sleep in the same bed at approximately 3:15 a.m. Around 6:30 a.m., Stevenson awoke to the sounds of Smith kicking in her apartment door. Smith entered the apartment, went into Stevenson’s bedroom, and shot Walls eleven times with a nine millimeter pistol. After shooting Walls, Smith hit Stevenson with the pistol and kicked her, causing an injury to her head which required ten stitches and an injury to her side which required three stitches. Stevenson fled to her sister’s apartment in the same complex, and Smith left the scene. Later that day, police found him hiding in a shed behind the house of another ex-girlfriend. Smith still possessed the pistol and threatened to commit suicide; he surrendered after about two hours of negotiation.

Decided November 9, 1998.

John O. Ellis, Jr., for appellant.

J. Tom Morgan, District Attorney, Barbara B. Conroy, Maria Murder-Ashley, Assistant District Attorneys, Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, Paula K. Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Jayson Phillips, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

1. Viewed to support the verdicts, the evidence was sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Smith was guilty of malice murder and aggravated assault. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979).

2. Stevenson testified that Smith told her that “he wasn’t going to see me with anybody else . . . before he would see me with someone else, he would see me dead,” and that “he was going to kill Caleb ... he swore on his grandmother’s grave, that he was going to kill him.” Smith objected that this testimony showed “prior difficulties” between Smith and the victims, that the State had not provided Smith with proper notice, and that the court had not held a hearing as required under Rules 31.1 and 31.3 of the Uniform Superior Court Rules (USCR). Smith cites Maxwell v. State, 262 Ga. 73, 75 (414 SE2d 470) (1992), for the proposition that it was error to admit this evidence without compliance with USCR 31.1 and 31.3. Maxwell was overruled in Wall v. State, 269 Ga. 506, 509 (500 SE2d 904) (1998), wherein this Court specifically held that USCR 31.1 and 31.3 would not apply to evidence of “prior difficulties” between a defendant and a victim. Consequently, Smith’s argument is meritless.

Judgments affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

The crimes were committed on June 1,1996. Smith was indicted by a DeKalb County grand jury in the July 1996 term for malice murder, aggravated assault, and assault. He was tried before a jury June 23-25, 1997, and found guilty of malice murder and aggravated assault; no verdict was returned on assault. Smith received a sentence of life in prison for malice murder, and a consecutive sentence of ten years for aggravated assault. He filed a notice of appeal on July 23,1997, and his appeal was docketed in this Court on January 22, 1998. The appeal was submitted for decision without oral argument on March 16, 1998.