Brown v. State

Given the overwhelming evidence of malice, the trial court's error in charging that the jury could infer an intent to kill from the use of a deadly weapon was harmless.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

A jury convicted Michael Brown of the malice murder of Willie Ben Nelson, Jr., aggravated assault of Gregory Ladson, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.1 Brown contends that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that it could infer his intent to kill from the use of a deadly weapon. Because of the overwhelming evidence of malice, we conclude that the improper jury charge was harmless error and affirm.

1. Brown lived in the basement apartment of Nelson’s house in northwest Atlanta where they had an argument on October 26, 1999. Later that afternoon, Nelson was sitting on a retaining wall at Walter Lasseter’s house and drinking beer with Lasseter and Ladson when Brown walked up and Nelson spoke to him. Brown then pulled a black handgun out of his belt and fired several times, hitting Nelson in the back and buttocks and Ladson in the arm and leg. Ladson survived the shooting, but Nelson died of internal bleeding from his gunshot wounds. Police found five .380 cartridge casings at the scene that were fired from the same pistol as the two bullets they recovered. Both Lasseter and Ladson identified Brown, whom they had known since childhood, as the shooter. When the fugitive squad attempted to arrest Brown several weeks later, Brown jumped from a second story window and suffered head injuries from his fall. Asserting an alibi defense at trial, Brown testified that he was selling crack cocaine on a nearby street at the time of the shooting and did not even own a gun. After reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury’s determination of guilt, we conclude that a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt.2

Brown v. State

Given the overwhelming evidence of malice, the trial court's error in charging that the jury could infer an intent to kill from the use of a deadly weapon was harmless.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report