Heard v. State
317 Ga. App. 663
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Heard was convicted after a bench trial of criminal attempt to entice a child for indecent purposes.
- In July 2011, a 12-year-old victim received texts from an unknown number that, later, she learned was Heard.
- The messages included Heard asking the victim to send a naked photo; the victim refused and explained Heard was old and that it was wrong.
- The victim notified Heard’s son to tell Heard to stop texting; Heard’s wife later confronted Heard, who admitted sending a text and may have forwarded a naked-picture request.
- A Verizon representative testified about roughly 40 text exchanges between Heard’s wife’s phone and the victim’s phone within a short time frame.
- The State charged Heard with one crime: criminal attempt to entice a child for indecent purposes; Heard appealed contending insufficiency of evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for attempted enticing | Heard argues no asportation; cannot prove attempted enticing. | Heard contends the evidence shows an attempted enticement toward a completed crime with no asportation required for attempt. | Insufficient evidence to prove all elements of attempted enticing of a child; reversed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rankin v. State, 278 Ga. 704 (Ga. 2004) (standard of review for sufficiency; no weight of evidence by appellate court)
- Cimildoro v. State, 259 Ga. 788 (Ga. 1990) (asportation element can be satisfied by movement in any form)
- Bragg v. State, 217 Ga. App. 342 (Ga. App. 1995) (no evidence of movement toward another place defeats enticing)
- Henderson v. State, 303 Ga. App. 531 (Ga. App. 2010) (no evidence defendant enticed or urged movement to another area)
- Dennard v. State, 243 Ga. App. 868 (Ga. App. 2000) (attempted enticing may be proven by substantial steps toward meeting where asportation would occur)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency review for rational trier of fact beyond reasonable doubt)
