White v. the State
332 Ga. App. 495
Ga. Ct. App.2015Background
- In 1996 Michael Jerome White (with co-defendant Alvin Jones) followed 63-year-old Jack Morris to his home, confronted him with a gun, forced him inside, took property (ring, watch, money, credit cards, guns) and demanded money.
- White forced Morris to remove rifles and shotguns from a locked gun cabinet and to place ammunition in a bag; later moved Morris between bedrooms, put a pillow over his head, and shot him in the chest; Morris survived after surgery.
- White admitted at trial to being at Morris’s house with a gun, intending to steal, taking property (including pawning Morris’s ring), shooting Morris, hiding guns, and discarding his shirt (blood on shirt matched Morris).
- At trial the judge asked Morris, at the end of his testimony, whether he had given White authority to enter or hold him; defense objected that the court was eliciting elements the State failed to prove.
- White was convicted in 1997 of armed robbery, kidnapping with bodily injury, and burglary; the trial court later granted an out-of-time appeal and this Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | White's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trial court questioning of witness | Judge improperly elicited elements (invited evidence) to remedy State's failure and defense intended to move for directed verdict | Judge may question witnesses to develop truth; no improper expression of opinion | No error — judicial questioning was within discretion |
| Sufficiency: armed robbery | Evidence insufficient to prove armed robbery | Evidence showed gunpoint taking of property (ring, watch, money, cards, guns) with intent to steal | Affirmed — evidence supports armed robbery conviction |
| Sufficiency: burglary | Entry might have been with authority or not meet statute elements | Morris testified White forced him inside; White admitted entering to steal | Affirmed — forced entry and intent to steal support burglary conviction |
| Sufficiency: kidnapping with bodily injury | Movement may have been incidental to robbery/burglary and not a separate asportation causing independent danger | Under Garza factors, the final movement to the bedroom occurred after robbery/burglary and presented independent danger (isolating, disabling communication, then shooting) | Affirmed — asportation met and bodily injury occurred, supporting kidnapping conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Finley v. State, 286 Ga. 47 (trial judge may question witnesses to develop truth)
- Dickens v. State, 280 Ga. 320 (court questioning witness is discretionary)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
- Garza v. State, 284 Ga. 696 (four-factor Garza test for asportation in kidnapping)
- Drake v. State, 241 Ga. 583 (appellate review limited to whether any evidence supports verdict)
- Upton v. Hardeman, 291 Ga. 720 (movement that isolates victim can present independent danger)
- Hammond v. State, 289 Ga. 142 (Garza standard applied to determine asportation)