James Edward Mapp was convicted of two counts of simple assault upon his wife, Laura.
1. On appeal his attorney has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel, a brief, and an enumeration of errors pursuant to the requirements of
Anders v. California,
Counsel’s motion is denied. Pursuant to the holding in
Fields v. State,
2. The court below did not err in failing to advise Laura Mapp of the marital privilege. OCGA § 24-9-23 provides that one spouse is competent to testify against the other, but the State cannot compel this testimony. The privilege of refusing to testify belongs to the witness and not to the accused.
James v. State,
3. Appellant further asserts as error the trial court’s charge of the whole of OCGA § 16-5-21 (2), which defines the manner in which aggravated assault can be committed. He claims that the court should have given the jury limiting instructions because he was indicted on two counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.
It is usually not reversible error for the trial court to charge an entire Code section even though a part of the charge may be inapplicable under the facts in evidence.
Smith v. State,
4. In view of the fact that this appeal was filed with an
Anders
motion attached, we have made an independent review of the transcript and proceedings below and find no error. A rational trier of fact was authorized by the evidence adduced at trial to find Mapp guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Jackson v. Virginia,
5. Appellant has filed a pro se brief and enumeration of errors. Under our holding in
Seagraves v. State,
Judgment affirmed.
