Davis v. State (2021)

When assessing the sufficiency of the evidence, “we view the evidence presented at trial in the light most favorable to the verdicts,” Drennon v. State, 314 Ga. 854, 861 (3) (880 SE2d 139) (2022), and “we put aside any questions about conflicting evidence, the credibility of witnesses, or the weight of the evidence, leaving the resolution of such things to the discretion of the jury,” Davis, 312 Ga. at 872-873 (1) (citation and punctuation omitted).

In making that determination, “we put aside any questions about conflicting evidence, the credibility of witnesses, or the weight of the evidence, leaving the resolution of such things to the discretion of the jury.” Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 872-873 (1) (866 4 A stipulation stating that Appellant had been convicted of a felony offense in 2009 was admitted at trial to support Appellant’s charge for being a felon in possession of a firearm. 15 SE2d 390 ) (2021) (citation a…

See OCGA § 17-8-58 (a), (b); Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 873 (2) ( 866 SE2d 390 ) (2021) (Failure to charge on voluntary manslaughter was reviewed only for plain error where the appellant “made a written 5 request for a jury charge on voluntary manslaughter” and argued the point at the charge conference but “did not object to the omission of the charge after the trial court instructed the jury.”); Anderson v. State, 309 Ga. 618, 622-623 (3) ( 847 SE2d 572 ) (2020) (Where th…

This Court will uphold the jury’s verdict “[a]s long as there is some competent evidence, even if contradicted, to support each fact necessary to make out the State’s case.” Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 873 (1) ( 866 SE2d 390 ) (2021) (citation and punctuation omitted).

Thus, we will affirm the jury’s verdict “[a]s long as there is some competent evidence, even if contradicted, to support each fact necessary to make out the State’s case[.]” Davis, 312 Ga. at 873 (1) (citation and punctuation omitted).

See Charles v. State, 315 Ga. 651, 651, 654-55 (2) (884 SE2d 363) (2023) (affirming convictions where defendant asserted that the evidence was constitutionally insufficient but failed to articulate “why he contend[ed] that the trial 8 evidence was insufficient to support his convictions, much less formulated an argument showing that the trial evidence failed to prove an essential element of any crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt”); Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 871, 873 …

See OCGA § 17-8-58 (b); Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 873 ( 866 SE2d 390 ) (2021) (explaining that the failure to charge the jury on voluntary manslaughter could be reviewed only for plain error where the appellant “made a written request for a jury charge on voluntary manslaughter” and argued the point at the charge conference but “did not object to the omission of the charge after the trial court instructed the jury”).

An error cannot be plain where there is no controlling authority on point.” Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 874 (2) ( 866 SE2d 390 ) (2021) (citation and punctuation omitted).

See id. at 843- 44 (2) (recounting this Court’s holdings that have affirmed the rejection of a voluntary manslaughter charge, including cases involving arguments over money, past acts of violence, ongoing marital difficulties, and laughter and derision at the defendant’s expense); Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 874 (2) ( 866 SE2d 390 ) (2021) 10 (“Even slight evidence showing that the victim seriously provoked the defendant requires the trial court to give a requested charge o…

Here, Appellant’s plain error claim fails because he has not identified a legal error that is “clear or obvious under current law.” Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 874 (2021) (citation omitted) (“An error cannot be plain where there is no controlling authority on point.”).

Here, Appellant’s plain error claim fails because he has not identified a legal error that is “clear or obvious under current law.” Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 874 (2021) (citation omitted) (“An error cannot be plain where there is no controlling authority on point.”).

An error cannot be plain where there is no controlling authority on point.” Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 874 (2) ( 866 SE2d 390 ) (2021).

An error cannot be plain where there is no controlling authority on point.” Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 874 (2) ( 866 SE2d 390 ) (2021).

See also Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 874 (2) ( 866 SE2d 390 ) (2021) (“Neither fear that someone is going to pull a [weapon] nor fighting are the types of provocation which demand a voluntary manslaughter charge.” (citation and punctuation omitted)).

See Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 874 (2) ( 866 SE2d 390 ) (2021).

See Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 874 (2) ( 866 SE2d 390 ) (2021) (holding on plain-error review that “there was no obvious error in the trial court’s refusal to give a voluntary manslaughter instruction” where the appellant cited “no precedent requiring a voluntary manslaughter instruction under circumstances similar to those presented” in that case and this Court found none (citation and punctuation omitted)).

“On appeal, it is the defendant’s burden to show that the trial evidence was insufficient as a matter of constitutional due process to support his convictions.” Charles v. State, 315 Ga. 651, 653 (2) ( 884 SE2d 363 ) (2023); see also Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 873 (1) n.2 ( 866 SE2d 390 ) (2021) (affirming a defendant’s convictions where his “only” sufficiency argument lacked merit and he “ha[d] not otherwise shown that the evidence supporting the child cruelty convictions…

See Davis v. State, 312 Ga. 870, 873 (1) ( 866 SE2d 390 ) (2021) (jury authorized to reject self-defense claim in part because the defendant “admitted that he did not see [the victim] pull a gun during the incident”).