Strozier v. State

The victim's alleged prior sexual molestation of the then 15-year-old defendant was not relevant in the defendant's trial for aggravated battery, since a prior sexual act against a minor is violent only because of its non-consensual nature and it did not tend to support the defendant's claim that the victim hit him in the face with a tape recorder.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Jason Lamar Strozier was found guilty by a jury of two counts of aggravated battery against a victim more than 65 years of age in violation of OCGA § 16-5-24 a and d. Strozier claimed he acted justifiably in self-defense, and that the trial court erred by refusing to allow him to support this claim by introducing evidence that the victim had engaged in prior violent acts amounting to child molestation against him and a third person. Because the alleged prior acts were not relevant to Strozier’s justification defense, we find no error and affirm. 1. The evidence showed that Strozier repeatedly struck the victim in her face with his fists causing multiple facial fractures, serious disfigurement, and loss of use of an eye. An eyewitness testified that the attack occurred when the victim age 70, who lived in the same house with Strozier age 26, went to Strozier’s room to retrieve her tape recorder. The witness said that, when the victim told Strozier he should be more respectful of other people’s property, Strozier repeatedly struck her in the head and face with his fists. According to the witness, Strozier punched the victim from one side of the room to the other, and continued to punch her after she fell to the floor unconscious with her face covered in blood. In his defense, Strozier testified that, when he handed the tape recorder to the victim, she charged at him and repeatedly hit him in the face with the recorder. He testified that the victim out-weighed him and that he punched her only to defend himself from her violent assault. The evidence was sufficient for the jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the State disproved Strozier’s self-defense claim and that he was guilty of the charged offenses. OCGA § § 16-5-24; 16-3-21 a; Andrews v. State , 267 Ga. 473, 474 480 SE2d 29 1997; Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U. S. 307 99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560 1979.

2. We find no error in the trial court’s refusal to admit evidence proffered by Strozier that the victim had committed prior acts of violence against him and a third party.

Strozier v. State

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report