Thomas v. State
322 Ga. App. 734
Ga. Ct. App.2013Background
- Thomas appeals robbery and misdemeanor obstruction convictions; argues improper admission of character evidence and insufficient evidence for both offenses; trial court issued curative instructions after misstep.
- Patel identified the robber from a photo lineup and at trial; the description matched Thomas.
- Officer Sublett encountered Thomas near a known associate of the robber and pursued him after he walked away and ran.
- Court analyzes whether the obstruction offense was violated based on whether Sublett clearly commanded Thomas to stop; also reviews admissibility and curative effect of a minor reference to a Sheriff’s Department website.
- Court concludes sufficient evidence supports robbery but not obstruction; character-evidence issue preserved and curative instructions were adequate; judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preservation of error on character evidence | Thomas preserved the issue by moving for mistrial | State claims waiver under Griffin; Thomas renewed after curative instructions | Issue preserved; curative instructions adequate |
| Sufficiency of robbery evidence | Patel's identification and description establish elements | Robbery conviction sustained on Jackson v. Virginia standard | |
| Sufficiency of obstruction evidence | Thomas fled following an unlawful command; obstruction proven | Encounter was first-tier; voluntary flight cannot support obstruction | Insufficient evidence to support obstruction conviction |
| Admission of character evidence via web-site reference | Reference injected character into issue | Reference was inadvertent; curative instructions proper | No reversible error; mistrial not warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- Griffin v. State, 230 Ga. 449 (1973) (waiver analysis for failure to raise evidentiary issue)
- Tarver v. State, 186 Ga. App. 905 (1988) (renewal of mistrial motion after curative instruction matters)
- Ewumi v. State, 315 Ga. App. 656 (2012) (first-tier vs second-tier encounters; command clarity)
- Dukes v. State, 279 Ga. App. 247 (2006) (second-tier detention; command to stop not clearly given)
- Black v. State, 281 Ga. App. 40 (2006) (police-citizen encounter; language used not a command)
- Couch v. State, 246 Ga. App. 106 (2000) (words or commands during encounter; evidentiary impact)
- State v. Fisher, 293 Ga. App. 228 (2008) (second-tier detention analysis)
- Porter v. State, 224 Ga. App. 276 (1997) (flight after police encounter; first-tier context)