Chynoweth v. the State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that OCGA § 16-10-56 (a), riot in a penal institution, and OCGA § 16-10-24 (b), obstruction of a law-enforcement officer by offering violence, “do not define the same offense and are unambiguous”
• evidence that defendant swung his fist at officer was sufficient to affirm conviction for obstruction and riot in a penal institution for committing an act in a violent manner
• “It is sufficient for the State to show that a crime was committed in any one of the separate ways listed in the indictment, even if the indictment uses the conjunctive rather than disjunctive form.”
• To determine whether intent is actually in issue in a case, “[t]he test is to ask: under the facts of the case, is there any danger that a rational jury could find that although the defendant committed the objective, charged acts, he did not intend to do so?”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).