Blanton v. State

O.C.G.A. § 17-7-53.1 did not bar the defendant's prosecution on his third indictment for incest and child molestation, since, at the time of the ruling, neither his first nor his second indictment had been quashed and the defendant's first indictment was eventually nolle prossed.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

After the State indicted him for multiple counts of incest and child molestation, Dean Blanton filed a plea of former jeopardy and a motion to dismiss the indictment. He appeals from the trial court’s denial of the motion, contending that prosecution on the indictment is barred because the State charged him with the same offenses in two previous indictments. He also contends, in the alternative, that the court erred in denying his special demurrer to the most recent indictment, arguing that the State failed to show that it was unable to identify specific dates, or reasonably narrow the ranges of dates, during which he allegedly committed the offenses. For the following reasons, we affirm.

The record shows the following undisputed, relevant facts. In October 2010, the Lowndes County Grand Jury returned an indictment hereinafter, “the first indictment” charging Blanton with two counts of incest, three counts of child molestation, and one count of making a terroristic threat. The indictment alleged that Blanton committed acts of incest involving the older of his two daughters “on or about the 1st day of May, 2008 and the 30th day of April, 2010, the exact date and time unknown to the Grand Jury, but known to the accused.” It charged him with committing child molestation against his younger daughter “on or about the 1st day of May, 2008 and the 13th day of December 2009, the exact date and time unknown to the Grand Jury, but known to the accused.” Blanton filed general and special demurrers to the indictment, and, although the court denied the demurrers, the State decided to obtain a new indictment in order to narrow the ranges of dates alleged in the child molestation counts.

Blanton v. State

O.C.G.A. § 17-7-53.1 did not bar the defendant's prosecution on his third indictment for incest and child molestation, since, at the time of the ruling, neither his first nor his second indictment had been quashed and the defendant's first indictment was eventually nolle prossed.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report