THOMPSON v. the STATE.
343 Ga. App. 60
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Victim, who uses a wheelchair/scooter, and Thompson were in a rocky dating relationship; an evening dispute occurred at the victim’s residence.
- Thompson slapped the victim, took her phone, lifted/tossed her out of her scooter; victim immediately knew her arm was broken.
- Victim sustained fractures to the ulna and radius requiring surgery; radiologist opined fractures were "atypical" for a fall (no wrist injury), suggesting they were not caused by a fall.
- Thompson sent Facebook messages minimizing the injury and told officers he had "barely hit" the victim; he denied touching her at trial but admitted berating her and leaving her on the floor after she "fell."
- Grand jury indicted Thompson on multiple counts; jury convicted him of aggravated battery and acquitted on other counts. Thompson appealed, arguing the prosecutor made an improper closing argument and the court should have rebuked and instructed the jury.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether prosecutor’s closing remark that the injury location made a fall "impossible" was improper argument requiring rebuke/instruction | Thompson: prosecutor drew an improper inference from the evidence and trial court should have rebuked and remedied the jury | State: prosecutor argued a reasonable inference from expert and victim testimony about atypical fracture pattern and victim’s account | Court: statement was a permissible inference from the evidence; trial court did not abuse discretion in overruling objection or in declining to rebuke or instruct |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence in criminal cases)
- Hall v. State, 335 Ga. App. 895 (appellate review view of evidence and presumption of innocence explained)
- Thompson v. State, 321 Ga. App. 756 (prosecutorial latitude in closing and reasonable inferences)
- Galvan v. State, 330 Ga. App. 589 (trial court not abusing discretion in denying objection to prosecutor’s closing)
- Wingfield v. State, 297 Ga. App. 476 (prosecutor may argue reasonable inferences; no error in overruling objection)