Royal v. State
314 Ga. App. 20
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Royal appeals from an interlocutory order denying his motions to dismiss, special demurrer, quash, and plea in bar as to counts 1–16 (insurance fraud) and 19 (theft by taking), arguing the statute of limitations had expired.
- Counts allege insurance fraud based on statements from 2004–2006 and allege the crimes were unknown to the State until after July 5, 2006.
- Under OCGA § 17-3-1(c) a four-year statute applies; tolling under § 17-3-2(2) imputes victim knowledge to the State, requiring actual knowledge of the crime.
- UNUM received the May 3, 2006 tip; surveillance occurred in June 2006 with no substantiation; July 5, 2006 interview and documents allegedly support a reasonable suspicion; formal referral filed August 10, 2006.
- The trial court held tolling applied and that indictment on July 1, 2010 was timely; Count 19 was nolled, rendering that issue moot.
- The Supreme Court Jenkins decision is distinguished; tolling ends when the victim first has actual knowledge of the acts, not merely identity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether tolling cures time-bar for counts 1–16 | Royal contends the four-year limit ran before indictment. | Royal argues actual knowledge existed earlier, tolling did not apply. | No error; tolling applicable; indictment timely. |
| When did the victim acquire actual knowledge of the acts, triggering tolling | UNUM had actual knowledge on May 3, 2006. | Actual knowledge occurred on July 5, 2006 when the investigator learned specifics. | Actual knowledge occurred July 5, 2006; tolling applied; timely indictment. |
| Does the nolle prosequi on Count 19 moot the challenge | Count 19 defects must be resolved on appeal. | State conceded issue; nolle prosequi disposed of Count 19 before appeal. | Issue moot; Count 19 disposition not reviewed. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Campbell, 295 Ga.App. 856 (2009) (tolling knowledge of crime by victim; de novo review of legal questions)
- Jenkins v. State, 278 Ga. 598 (2004) (tolling cannot be based on prosecutors' subjective opinions; actual knowledge timing controls)
- Higgenbottom v. State, 290 Ga. 198 (2011) (interview during investigation not actual knowledge of perpetrator identity)
- Robins v. State, 296 Ga.App. 437 (2009) (actual knowledge required; tolling ends when informed of crime acts)
- Merritt v. State, 254 Ga.App. 788 (2002) (tolling statute applied under known facts; four-year period preserved)
- State v. Bair, 303 Ga.App. 183 (2010) (distinguishable; not controlling on the knowledge-timing issue)