Dixon v. State

The trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motion for mistrial on grounds that the victim's testimony improperly placed his character in evidence when she testified that the defendant told her that he had killed before, because the statement was admissible as part of res gestae.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Following a jury trial, Robert Hampton Dixon was found guilty of rape OCGA § 16-6-1, kidnapping with bodily injury OCGA § 16-5-40, and aggravated assault OCGA § 16-5-21. He was acquitted of aggravated sodomy OCGA § 16-6-2. Dixon’s motion for an out-of-time appeal was granted, and he appeals from his conviction and from the denial of his amended motion for new trial. Finding no error, we affirm. On appellate review of a criminal conviction, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, and the defendant no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence.1 We do not weigh the evidence or judge the credibility of witnesses, but determine only if the evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find the defendant guilty of the offenses charged beyond a reasonable doubt.2

So viewed, the evidence shows that in June 2002, 26-year-old Melissa Battaglia was staying at a hotel in the Atlanta area while vacationing with two friends. In the early morning hours of June 16, 2002, while her friends were out at a club and Battaglia was by herself, she left her room, carrying only her room key, to go get a soda. Upon her return, she found herself locked out of her hotel room when her room key failed to function. She went to the front desk to ask for a replacement room key, but the clerk would not give her one because her name was not on the hotel registration. She then returned to her room to try the key again. When the key would not work, she waited in front of the hotel room, hoping her friends would return.

Dixon v. State

The trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motion for mistrial on grounds that the victim's testimony improperly placed his character in evidence when she testified that the defendant told her that he had killed before, because the statement was admissible as part of res gestae.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report