Cranford v. State

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in qualifying an officer as an expert on the damage a shotgun blast would cause to a car window based on his experience as a certified firearms instructor, who was familiar with the use of shotguns and the pattern of damage they cause.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Following a bench trial, the court found Carey Cranford guilty of aggravated assault, possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. On appeal, Cranford contends that the court erred in admitting certain evidence and in qualifying a witness as an expert. Cranford further contends that the trial judge erred in failing to recuse himself. For reasons that follow, we affirm. Viewed in a light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence shows that on August 18, 2002, Cranford and his wife, Diana, were riding in a car together when they began to argue about his drinking. Later that evening, Ms. Cranford woke to find her husband drunk and very upset. He began to load a shotgun while telling Ms. Cranford that he would “give her a reason to call the police.” Ms. Cranford fled the house in her bedclothes and drove away. As she was driving away, Cranford shot at her vehicle, shattering the driver’s side window and damaging the door.

Ms. Cranford called the police, and she met the responding officer, Deputy Shea Bunch, at a nearby truck stop. After Ms. Cranford told Bunch what had happened, Bunch called for backup and went to Cranford’s home. Cranford was sitting in a screened-in porch when the police arrived. When the police called for him to “come out,” Cranford stood up, picked up a shotgun, said “fuck you” to the officers, and went inside the house. The police requested additional backup, and the Sheriff arrived with Cranford’s father. Upon arrival, Cranford’s father went into the house, emerged with Cranford, and informed the police that the shotgun was just inside the door. The police sent Cranford’s brother, who arrived shortly after his father, to retrieve the shotgun and took Cranford into custody.

Cranford v. State

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in qualifying an officer as an expert on the damage a shotgun blast would cause to a car window based on his experience as a certified firearms instructor, who was familiar with the use of shotguns and the pattern of damage they cause.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report