Walter David Phillips v. State, 354 Ga. App. 88

On December 14, 2013 and other dates in 2013, three minor females (C.H., J.D., and M.B.) reported encounters with a man later identified as Walter David Phillips in a black truck: one incident involved a gesture to enter the passenger seat, another involved following and an invitation to put a bike in the truck, and a third involved a ‘‘money’’ gesture as the truck drove past.
Parents located and followed Phillips; during a stop Kenneth found a fallen passenger-side mirror that matched Phillips’s truck and several parents and children later identified Phillips at the scene; Phillips agreed to a police station interview and officers discovered reports of similar prior incidents.
Phillips was indicted on four counts of criminal attempt to entice a child for indecent purposes; the jury convicted him on three counts (acquitting on one) and the trial court sentenced him to 45 years (30 years confined, remainder on probation).
On appeal Phillips argued (1) insufficiency of the evidence, (2) erroneous denial of his motion to suppress statements, (3) erroneous admission of hearsay from a police report, and (4) erroneous refusal to charge the jury on the definition of "indecent acts."
The Court of Appeals reversed the convictions, holding the State failed to produce evidence that an act of indecency or child molestation was the intended motivation for the alleged enticements, an essential element under OCGA § 16-6-5 and the criminal-attempt statute.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence to convict for attempted enticing a child for indecent purposes	Phillips: evidence did not show intent to commit indecent acts; gestures and invitations were innocuous	State: testimony and circumstances supported attempt and intent	Reversed — insufficient evidence: no proof an indecent act or molestation was the intended motivation
Motion to suppress statements made during police interview	Phillips: statements should have been suppressed	State: statements admissible	Not reached — court reversed on sufficiency and did not decide suppression claim
Admission of hearsay from police report	Phillips: hearsay statements in report were inadmissible	State: admission proper or harmless	Not reached — not addressed due to reversal on sufficiency
Jury charge on definition of "indecent acts"	Phillips: trial court erred by refusing the requested definition	State: charge not required or unnecessary	Not reached — not addressed because conviction reversed

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes sufficiency of the evidence standard on appellate review)
Harvey v. State, 344 Ga. App. 761 (discusses standard of review and that conflicts in evidence are for the jury)
Garza v. State, 347 Ga. App. 335 (enticing a child requires both act of enticement and intent to commit indecent acts)
Dennard v. State, 243 Ga. App. 868 (explains "substantial step" test for criminal attempt)
Lasseter v. State, 197 Ga. App. 498 (conviction under OCGA § 16-6-5 requires some evidence that indecency or molestation motivated the enticement)
Carolina v. State, 276 Ga. App. 298 (contrast case where facts supported an inference of sexual intent and sustained conviction)