## Facts

- Around 2:00 a.m. on April 1, 2000, the victim and two friends went to the Hale Street Apartments in Augusta, Georgia, where a large crowd had gathered in a parking lot.
- The victim became involved in an argument in the parking lot.
- Thompson came out of an upstairs apartment; the victim knew him only by the nickname “Shotgun.”
- Thompson fired three shots in the victim’s direction; the second shot grazed the victim over his left eye.
- The victim, frightened, ran to the street and called for help.
- A Richmond County jury convicted Thompson of aggravated assault, possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, given Thompson’s claim he lacked intent to assault and fired only to quell a disturbance.
2. Whether testimony that Thompson’s nickname was “Shotgun” was improperly admitted as prejudicial character evidence rather than permissible identification evidence.
3. Whether the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on reckless conduct as a lesser included offense of aggravated assault.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Georgia affirmed the convictions and sentence.
- The evidence was sufficient for a rational jury to find aggravated assault with a deadly weapon because firing toward the victim and grazing his eye supported either an attempted violent injury or placing the victim in reasonable apprehension of immediate violent injury.
- The trial court properly admitted the nickname “Shotgun” because it was relevant to how the victim knew and identified Thompson.
- The trial court was not required to charge reckless conduct because the evidence supported either aggravated assault or no crime; there was no evidentiary basis for a lesser-offense verdict.

## Legal Principles

- Aggravated assault requires proof of an assault as defined by statute, aggravated by use of a deadly weapon.
- Simple assault may be shown by an attempt to commit a violent injury or by an act placing another in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury.
- On sufficiency review, the appellate court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and asks whether a rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; intent may be inferred from conduct and surrounding circumstances.
- Evidence of a defendant’s nickname is admissible when relevant to witness identification and not offered solely to show bad character.
- A lesser-included-offense charge is required only when there is some evidence that would authorize a verdict on the lesser offense; the court may refuse the charge where the evidence presents an all-or-nothing choice.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed Thompson’s convictions, holding that firing a handgun toward the victim and grazing him supported aggravated assault, the “Shotgun” nickname was admissible for identification, and the record did not warrant a reckless-conduct instruction.


Thompson v. State, 277 Ga. App. 323, 626 S.E.2d 825 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006)