Kinsey v. State
326 Ga. App. 616
Ga. Ct. App.2014Background
- Late night, four men (including Kinsey and White) picked up the victim from an apartment complex; the victim was beaten, duct-taped, hog-tied, placed in the trunk, and driven away.
- An Aspen Woods resident observed furtive activity around a silver/gray four‑door car with four black‑clad men and called 911 while watching them leave; dispatch relayed a BOLO to officers.
- Officers stopped a silver vehicle minutes later as it exited the complex; occupants matched the 911 description.
- Officers found a shotgun and rifle cases, a ski mask, and opened the trunk to discover the bound, injured victim; Kinsey and White were passengers in the car and were identified by the victim.
- Kinsey and White were convicted by a jury of kidnapping with bodily injury, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime; both appealed denials of their motions for new trial and suppression (and White challenged admission of his book‑in photo).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers had articulable suspicion to stop the vehicle (suppression) | Kinsey/White: 911 tip alone insufficient; needed more corroboration | State: Tip from an on‑site resident relayed by dispatch plus immediate matching observations provided reasonable suspicion | Stop was valid — citizen 911 + dispatch + near‑immediate corroboration justified investigative stop |
| Whether subsequent restraint/arrest lacked probable cause (Kinsey) | Kinsey: forcible removal, handcuffing and patrol car placement amounted to an arrest without probable cause | State: Kinsey only challenged the stop in the suppression motion; did not preserve an arrest‑based challenge | Issue waived — Kinsey adopted co‑defendants’ arguments and did not preserve claim about arrest |
| Sufficiency of the evidence for kidnapping, aggravated assault, and firearm possession | Defendants: challenged that evidence was insufficient and mere presence cannot support convictions | State: Victim ID, testimony of assault, presence of firearms in same vehicle, and circumstances supported aider/abettor liability | Evidence was sufficient as to all convictions; jury could infer participation and possession as parties to the offenses |
| Refusal to give a requested charge on “mere presence” (both appellants) | Defendants: requested explicit mere‑presence instruction | State: Court’s given instructions on elements, burden, and party liability adequately addressed the concept | No reversible error — jury instructions read as a whole adequately covered the law; separate mere‑presence charge not required |
| Admissibility of book‑in (mug) photo (White) | White: photo was prejudicial and should be excluded | State: Photo was neutral, showed clothing matching 911 tip, and was probative | Trial court did not abuse discretion in admitting the photograph |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. State, 324 Ga. App. 508 (describing facts and arrest/stop chronology relied on by appellate court)
- Prather v. State, 279 Ga. App. 873 (dispatcher report and corroboration give articulable suspicion)
- Slocum v. State, 267 Ga. App. 337 (reliability of informant/911 tips for reasonable suspicion)
- McNair v. State, 267 Ga. App. 872 (vehicle matching BOLO minutes after report supports stop)
- McWhorter v. State, 198 Ga. App. 493 (presence, companionship, and conduct may support aider/abettor inference)
- Victrum v. State, 203 Ga. App. 377 (co‑defendant within arm’s reach of firearm can support possession conviction as party)
- Sharpe v. State, 288 Ga. 565 (mug shots generally not unfairly prejudicial when related to the charged offense)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)