State v. Anderson

The trial judge erred in expressing an opinion as to whether the state proved venue when he told the prosecutor that he wanted to be sure that venue was established.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

In Anderson v. State , 297 Ga. App. 733 678 SE2d 498 2009, the Court of Appeals reversed George Anderson’s convictions for armed robbery, kidnapping, possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, and financial transaction card fraud, holding that the trial court violated OCGA § 17-8-571 by expressing an opinion as to whether venue had been proven on the fraud charge. We granted the State’s petition for certiorari in order to consider the propriety of that ruling and, for the reasons that follow, we affirm. 1. The evidence adduced at trial established that the manager of a Sally Beauty Supply store received a telephone call just before 9:00 one morning, asking what time the store opened. Shortly after the manager told the male caller that the store was already open, an armed, masked man entered. He pointed a gun at the manager, ordered her to the back of the store, removed money from the store’s registers and safe, and took the manager’s credit cards from her purse. At approximately 10:15 that morning, Anderson bought a pair of sneakers from an Underground Station store using one of the stolen credit cards. The salesperson knew Anderson because he was a regular customer, and identified him both in a photographic lineup on the day of the crimes and at trial. Anderson’s cell phone records showed that he called the Sally Beauty Supply at 8:58 on the morning of the crimes, using a calling feature to block his number from displaying on the receiving phone’s “Caller ID.”

At trial, the location of Sally Beauty Supply was clearly established through the store manager’s testimony. When the prosecutor attempted to elicit testimony from the Underground Station employee as to that store’s location, however, the following transpired:

State v. Anderson

The trial judge erred in expressing an opinion as to whether the state proved venue when he told the prosecutor that he wanted to be sure that venue was established.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report