Brown v. StateBrown v. State
- Reporters:
- , , ,
- Before:
- Harold
Antonio Brown was convicted of kidnapping with bodily injury, burglary, and aggravаted assault. On appeal, he challenges the denial оf his motions for directed verdict and new trial, the sufficiency of the evidence, and a jury charge.
The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, revealed the following. Sims v. State, 266 Ga. 764, 765 (1) (470 SE2d 886) (1996). A рolice officer spotted a stolen red Mustang parked at a telephone booth. Two black males sat in the car, waiting while a third made a telephone call. The offiсer followed when the Mustang pulled away. At a red light, the officer pulled next to the Mustang and recognized its occupants, оne of whom was Brown. He also identified the driver as Brown’s brother and co-defendant, Wesley Stewart. A high speed chase ensuеd, culminating when the Mustang ran off the road. Its occupants fled into some nearby woods.
Eventually Brown and Stewart separatеd from the other passenger and ran to a residential subdivision, with police from several jurisdictions, a law enforcement helicopter, and an armed private citizen in pursuit. After entеring a home in the subdivision, Brown and Stewart discovered the victim reаding a newspaper while her two young daughters played a game. One of the men demanded that the victim give him her keys. 1 He then grаbbed her around the neck and walked toward her bedroom. The victim screamed, which alarmed *242 her husband who was showering. The husband got his gun, discovered his wife’s situation, and demanded that Brown and Stewаrt leave. The man holding the victim threatened to kill her, and baсked toward the kitchen door, released the victim, and exited. A police officer standing outside apprehended bоth men. Held-.
1. Notwithstanding Brоwn’s argument to the contrary, the evidence is sufficient to support each of the offenses charged. Assuming without deciding that Brоwn was not the man who grabbed the victim, the record shows that, in any event, he acted as a lookout and warned his brother of the husband’s gun. See
Thompson v. State,
210 Ga. App. 655, 656 (1) (436 SE2d 799) (1993). Thus, no proof that Brown actually touched the victim was necessary to support the kidnapping with bodily injury chargе because by intentionally aiding and abetting the commission of the crime he became a party to it. See
We reject Brown’s contention that no evidence of intent to commit theft supported the burglary count. The record shows that after the fleeing men entered the house they demanded the victim’s keys. This evidence entitled the jury to infer that the men intended to steal the victim’s car.
2. The trial court did not err in charging the jury on party to a crime. As noted, the evidence supported the charge. See Capers v. State, 220 Ga. App. 869, 871 (1) (b) (470 SE2d 887) (1996).
Judgment affirmed.
Beasley and Blackburn, JJ, concur.
Notes
Neither the victim nor her husband could remember whether Brown or Stewart grabbed the victim.