ELLINGTON, P. J., ANDREWS and RICKMAN, JJ.
Lawrence Carpenter was tried by a jury and convicted of
aggravated assault, criminal attempt to commit kidnaping, and
two counts of possession of a firearm during a crime. On
appeal, Carpenter contends that the trial court erred by
allowing the victim to identify him during the trial or,
alternatively, that his counsel was ineffective by failing to
object to the identification. Carpenter also challenges the
sentence imposed by the trial court. For the following
reasons, we affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand this
case for resentencing with direction.
On appeal from a criminal conviction, we view the evidence
in the light most favorable to support the jury's
verdict, and the defendant no longer enjoys a presumption
of innocence. We do not weigh the evidence or judge the
credibility of the witnesses, but determine only whether
the evidence authorized the jury to find the defendant
guilty of the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt in
accordance with the standard set forth in Jackson v.
Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560)
(Citation and punctuation omitted.) Hall v. State,
335 Ga.App. 895 (783 S.E.2d 400) (2016).
viewed, the evidence showed that on the afternoon of March
29, 2012, the victim was working at a dry cleaning store in
Houston County. A male parked in the drive-thru of the store
and from outside of a clear glass door, asked the victim how
long it would take for a suit to be cleaned. The victim
replied and the male indicated that he would need it sooner
than the victim believed it would be ready. The victim called
another store to see if the suit could be cleaned faster and
she relayed the information from the other store to the male.
Another customer came into the store and the male told the
victim that she could help the other customer while he
decided what to do. The victim dealt with the other customer
quickly and then observed that the male appeared to be on the
phone so she did some other tasks around the store.
point, the victim turned around and observed that the male
was standing inside the store with a gun. The male ordered
the victim to "get in the car; get in the car; get in
the car." The victim refused but told the male to
"take the money." The male told the victim that he
did not want any money, he wanted her to "just get in
the car." The victim explained to the male that because
he had on sunglasses and a hat she would not be able to
identify him and he should just leave. The male stopped,
turned around, and left the store. As the male left in his
car, the victim was able to take a picture of the car with
her phone. The photograph depicted a Toyota 4Runner. The
numbers on the license plate were too blurry to identify so
the photograph was later transmitted to the police department
victim called 911, an officer responded to the scene, and the
victim gave the officer a description of the assailant. The
victim told the officer that the assailant was slightly
taller than the officer, not big but not "scrawny,
" had strawberry blonde hair, and wore a hat and
victim went to the police station for another interview.
While the victim was at the police station, the investigator
showed her a photographic line-up. The victim was not 100
percent positive, but she thought the assailant was
photograph number two in the line-up. The victim testified at
trial that Carpenter's photograph was number two in the
customer who entered the store while the victim was talking
to the assailant was also shown a photographic line-up. The
customer was also not 100 percent positive, but believed that
the male she saw in the store was photograph number two in
the line-up. The customer also testified at trial that
Carpenter's photograph was number two in the line-up.
officer who enhanced the photograph of the assailant's
car noticed two, dark in color, squares on the vehicle's
back window. The officer was also able to partially identify
the license plate number and determined that the name of the
county on the tag was four to five letters. A detective who
was assisting with the investigation began to run different
license plate number combinations through a computer system
and the results pointed to a Toyota 4Runner owned by
detective assigned to the case retrieved a copy of
Carpenter's driver's license. Carpenter's license
photograph was consistent with the physical description given
by the victim of the male perpetrator.
detective drove to Carpenter's address in Bibb County.
Neither Carpenter nor his vehicle were at the location;
however, at some point later, the detective and Carpenter
spoke on the telephone. Carpenter told the detective that he
had been playing golf, denied being near the incident
location, and stated that his license plate tag had been
detective later interviewed Carpenter at the police station
and asked for his cellular telephone number. The detective
obtained the telephone records for the telephone number
provided but discovered that there had not been much activity
on the phone which the detective thought was odd, considering
that Carpenter worked for a wireless communications company.
The detective thereafter called Carpenter's employer,
discovered that Carpenter had another cellular telephone, and
obtained the records for Carpenter's other cellular
telephone. Those records revealed that approximately 20
minutes before the ...