Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama; September 27, 1996; Alabama; State Appellate Court
Donald Graham, Sr. and Donald Graham, Jr. appeal their convictions for various offenses related to an altercation during the 1994 Mardi Gras festivities in Mobile, Alabama. Graham, Sr. was convicted of third-degree assault and resisting arrest, while Graham, Jr. faced charges of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. Both received a six-month jail sentence, with 30 days to serve, a $50 fine, and court costs, along with a one-year probation under a jail diversion program.
The incident involved a confrontation with Juan Hill over a 'moon pie' thrown from a parade float. Hill accused Graham, Sr. of threatening him with a knife, which led to police involvement. Officers Murphy and Byrts reported that Graham, Sr. reacted with obscenities and racial slurs when approached. During the arrest, Graham, Sr. allegedly made a movement suggesting he was reaching for a weapon, prompting the officers to intervene. Graham, Jr. attacked Officer Murphy, striking him in the head, and was ultimately subdued with pepper spray.
Graham, Sr. contests the sufficiency of evidence for his assault conviction, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove he caused physical injury to Officer Murphy. He cites the legal definition of third-degree assault, which requires intentional physical injury to a peace officer. The court acknowledged that while the assault charge is serious, the specific injury sustained by Officer Murphy—a 'busted lip' and 'skint nose'—was sufficient to meet the definition of physical injury under Alabama law, supporting the conviction. Prior case law indicates that even minor injuries can satisfy the requirements for third-degree assault.
Graham, Sr. was found not guilty of assault in the third degree due to a lack of evidence showing he caused physical injury to Officers Murphy and Byrts. The evidence indicated that Graham, Jr. was the one who assaulted Officer Murphy. The jury was not instructed on accomplice liability, and there was no proof of complicity, aligning with Alabama's criminal code, which defines assault as requiring actual physical injury. Graham, Sr. argued that without proof of assault, he could not be convicted of resisting arrest. However, testimony showed he physically resisted arrest when Officer Byrts attempted to detain him, providing sufficient grounds for the jury's verdict on resisting arrest.
Graham, Jr. contested the denial of his motion for acquittal on disorderly conduct charges, arguing insufficient evidence of a prima facie case. However, Officer Murphy's testimony revealed that Graham, Jr. acted disorderly, instigating a fistfight and shouting racial slurs, which justified the disorderly conduct charge. The court affirmed the convictions for resisting arrest against both Graham, Sr. and Graham, Jr., but reversed the assault conviction for Graham, Sr., rendering a judgment of not guilty on that charge. All judges concurred with the decision.
