From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jackson v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 12, 2001
252 Ga. App. 16 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001)

Opinion

A01A1190.

DECIDED: OCTOBER 12, 2001.

Child molestation, etc. Clayton Superior Court. Before Judge Ison.

Glaze, Glaze, Harris Arnold, Emmett J. Arnold, for appellant.

Robert E. Keller, District Attorney, Erman J. Tanjuatco, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.


Following a jury trial, Martino Jamar Jackson appeals his convictions for child molestation, aggravated child molestation, and sodomy, contending that: (1) the trial court erred by failing to merge the convictions for aggravated child molestation and sodomy and (2) there was a fatal variance between the indictment for aggravated aggravated child molestation and sodomy, and the evidence presented on those charges. Because Jackson waived these argument for purposes of appeal, we affirm.

1. Jackson first contends that the trial court should have merged his convictions for aggravated child molestation and sodomy as a matter of fact. Jackson further contends that, because of this error, he was improperly sentenced. Jackson, however, "did not object in the trial court to the sentences imposed nor contend that the offenses merged. Thus, the matter was not preserved for appellate review." (Punctuation omitted.) Wright v. State.

Wright v. State, 233 Ga. App. 358, 362 (4) ( 504 S.E.2d 261) (1998). See also Heard v. State, 232 Ga. App. 405, 406 (2) ( 501 S.E.2d 884) (1998).

2. Jackson contends that the indictment regarding the count of sodomy brought against him contained a fatal variance. Once again, however, Jackson has waived this error.

Because the record fails to demonstrate that [Jackson] raised the fatal variance issue on his [sodomy] conviction in the trial court, we may not address it here. Issues presented for the first time on appeal furnish nothing for us to review, for this is a court for correction of errors of law committed by the trial court where proper exception is taken, because one may not abandon an issue in the trial court and on appeal raise questions or issues neither raised nor ruled on by the trial court.

(Punctuation omitted.) Freeland v. State. Judgment affirmed. Pope, P.J., and Mikell, J., concur.

Freeland v. State, 233 Ga. App. 326, 327 (2) ( 477 S.E.2d 633) (1996).


DECIDED OCTOBER 12, 2001.


Summaries of

Jackson v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 12, 2001
252 Ga. App. 16 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001)
Case details for

Jackson v. State

Case Details

Full title:JACKSON v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Oct 12, 2001

Citations

252 Ga. App. 16 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001)
555 S.E.2d 240

Citing Cases

Butler v. State

"This Court is an appellate court for the correction of errors of law made by the trial court, which have as…

Riley v. State

Therefore, to the extent that he has not waived appellate review of this claim, we review it only for plain…