Case Information
*1 In the Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided: February 2, 2015 S14A1482. STEWART v. THE STATE.
BENHAM, Justice.
William Grant Stewart appeals his convictions for murder and related crimes in regard to the death of his five-month-old son James Antonio Stewart.
We view the evidence in a light most favorablе to the jury’s verdicts. On the day in question, appellant called 911 to report that the victim was not breathing. A sheriff’s deputy who responded to the 911 call testified that she *2 found the child lying in his crib, not breathing and without a discernible pulse. She administered CPR until paramedics arrived. The paramedics noted the child was exhibiting signs of oxygen deprivation and immediately transported him to the hospital. At the scene, appellant told the deputy that he and the co-defendant Matea Mendez Stewart, who was the child’s mother, had laid the child down for a nap and when they went back to check on him, he was unresponsive and had а blanket or towel over his face. A responding paramedic testified appellant told him that he had last checked on the child “20 minutes ago.” Before appellant and the co-defendаnt left for the hospital, the deputy informed them that their home was a crime scene and the couple gave their permission for authorities to stay inside the house to investigate. Investigators found reddish- brоwn stains on stuffed animals inside the child’s crib and some reddish-brown stains on a bib and burp cloth located in the couple’s bathroom. The stains were later determined to be the blood and DNA of the victim. The treating emergency hospital personnel were able to improve the victim’s breathing. The treating emergency physician said she discovered that the child had fractured *3 ribs and a bruised skull. While at the emergenсy hospital, appellant told police that he laid the victim down and checked on him twice in 30 minute intervals. Appellant said when he checked on the victim the second time, the victim had a towеl over his face and was not breathing; at that point, appellant called 911 and administered CPR as instructed by the 911 operator. Co-defendant agreed with appellant’s version of events. Appellant gave a written statement to the same effect.
The victim was transferred to a pediatric hospital where it was determined that he was brain dead due to a fracture of his skull and the accompanying hemorrhaging and swelling of his brain. One of the pediatric physicians testified that the brain injury occurred within hours of the child’s arriving at the hospital for treatment. In addition to the injuries to his brain and skull, the victim had multiple fractures to 15 out of 24 of his ribs and fractures to all of his extremities. These injuries were at various levels of healing, some more recent than others, and thus lead the treating doctors to suspect abuse of the child over a period of time. The evidence showed the injuries to the child’s ribs were consistent with being squeezed and some of the injuries to his extremities were consistent with the extremity being “yanked” at аn angle. The child also had *4 hemorrhaging of both eyes and a detached retina, indicating he had been subjected to violent force. The forensic pathologist concluded that the fatal injury was acute, that the victim died from craniocerebral trauma, and that the manner of death was homicide.
At the pediatric hospital, co-defendant told one of the pediatricians that, on the day of the fatal injury, appellant went to shower with the victim and that after the shower the victim had no interest in eating and was “dangly.” At trial, co-defendant testified that after the baby had been laid down for a naр, appellant twice went by himself to check on the crying victim and that when she eventually went to check on the victim, she found appellant with the victim who was unresponsive.
1. The evidence adduced at trial and summarized above was sufficient to
authorize a rational trier of fact to find appellant guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt of the crimes for which he was convicted. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S.
307 (
2. Aрpellant alleges the trial court erred when it failed to grant his motion to sever. Specifically, appellant argues the jury was confused because it returned verdicts of guilt against him on all counts in the indictment, whereas *5 it returned a verdict of guilt against co-defendant only on one count of felony murder predicated on deprivation. In support of his argument that the jury was confused, appellаnt opines that being punished for felony murder and deprivation of a child is improper, and that the trial court’s limiting instructions as to Bruton [3] were problematic.
This Court has held:
In a capital case in which the death penalty is not sought, a trial court's decision not to sever the trials of co-indictees is reviewed for abuse of discretion, and the movant must make a clear showing that the joint trial was prejudicial and resulted in a denial of due process. The existence of antagonistic defenses alone is insufficient to require the severance of a joint trial.
(Citations and internal quotations omitted.) Barge v. State,
3. Appellant contends the trial court erred when it admitted a post-autopsy
photograph of the victim’s brain injuries while the medical examiner was
testifying. “A photograph that depicts the victim after autopsy incisions or after
the pathologist changes the state of the body is admissible whеn necessary to
show some material fact which becomes apparent only because of the autopsy.”
(Citations and internal quotations omitted.) Norton v. State,
Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.
Notes
[1] The crimes occurred on July 28, 2010. On March 8, 2011, a Rockdale County grand jury indicted appellant and Matea Mendez Stewart with two counts of mаlice murder, two counts of felony murder, two counts of cruelty to a child in the first degree, and aggravated battery. The March 2011 indictment was dismissed, and, on June 28, 2012, appellant and co-defendant were re-indicted on one count of malice murder, three counts of felony murder, two counts of cruelty to a child in the first degree, one count of aggravated battery, and two counts of contributing to the deprivаtion of a minor. Appellant and his co-defendant were tried before a jury from September 4, to September 13, 2012, and the jury returned a verdict of guilty against appellant on all counts in the June 2012 indictment. On Oсtober 2, 2012, the trial court sentenced appellant to life in prison without parole for malice murder, twenty years to be served consecutively for one count of cruelty to a child in the first degree, and ten years to be served consecutively for one count of contributing to the deprivation of a minor. The counts of felony murder were vacated as a matter of law and all other сounts merged as a matter of fact into the malice murder conviction. Appellant moved for a new trial on October 11, 2012, and amended the motion on May 14, 2013. The trial court held a hearing on the motiоn for new trial as amended on December 19, 2013, and denied the motion on May 6, 2014. The case was docketed to the September 2014 Term of this Court for a decision to be made on the briefs.
[2] At trial, the evidenсe showed that appellant dated and married co-defendant while she was still pregnant with the victim and that the victim was not appellant’s biological child.
[3] Bruton v. United States,
[4] See also Coe v. State,
[5] Specifically, the post-autopsy photograph showed the detailed swеlling of the victim's brain and the results of that swelling pushing the unfused portions ("sutures") of the baby's skull apart and causing them to break. The medical term for this phenomenon is “diastatic fracture.”
[6] Appellant has withdrawn the enumerated error concerning the admission of polygraph test results, and so we will not consider the issue in this appeal.