Hart v. State
319 Ga. App. 749
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Hart appeals denial of motion to quash indictment charging three counts of sexual assault against a person in custody under OCGA § 16-6-5.1(b)(1).
- Indictment alleged Hart engaged in sexual contact with a student at the high school where he was employed as a paraprofessional and teacher with supervisory/disciplinary authority.
- Stipulations: Hart was a certified paraprofessional educator; he coached the high school track team and football as an assistant; he was assigned to the special needs classroom and assisted the certified teacher in daily lessons and behavior management; the principal would testify Hart had supervisory/disciplinary authority, though Hart disputed it.
- Statute OCGA § 16-6-5.1(b)(1) makes it a crime for a person with supervisory or disciplinary authority over a student to engage in sexual contact with that student who is enrolled at the same school.
- Court applied plain-meaning statutory interpretation, holding that the ordinary meaning of "teacher" includes a paraprofessional who teaches and has supervisory authority.
- Hart’s argument that he is not a teacher and thus not within the statute was rejected; the judgment denying the motion to quash was affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ‘teacher’ in §16-6-5.1(b)(1) includes a paraprofessional. | Hart, as a paraprofessional, argues he is not a teacher and thus not within the statute. | Hart disagrees with the State’s interpretation that ‘teacher’ encompasses paraprofessionals with supervisory authority. | Yes; the indictment sufficiently charges Hart as a ‘teacher’ under the ordinary meaning. |
| Whether the indictment properly alleges supervisory authority by Hart. | Stipulations show Hart had supervisory/disciplinary authority. | Hart disputes that authority. | Indictment properly allegeHart had supervisory authority sufficient under the statute. |
Key Cases Cited
- Frix v. State, 298 Ga. App. 538 (2009) (background on inclusion of broader terms in statutes)
- Luangkhot v. State, 292 Ga. 423 (2013) (court discusses statutory interpretation and definitions)
- Belvin v. State, 221 Ga. App. 114 (1996) (statutory interpretation and scope of the term 'teacher')
- 219 Ga. 509, 219 Ga. 509 (1963) (early authority on interpreting terms and intent)