539, 571 S.E.2d 529 (2002); Penland v. State, 258 Ga. App. Evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of three counts of felony obstruction because a jury could reasonably conclude that, when the defendant cried out immediately after the single shot was fired by the defendant's grandfather, the defendant was encouraging the grandfather to discharge the revolver for a second time at or near the officers before they had succeeded in returning to safety, and was thus offering violence to those officers; and, when the defendant shouted out immediately after the single shot was fired, the arresting deputies were forced to extinguish their flashlights so as to prevent being seen and shot by the grandfather, thus hindering their efforts to secure the defendant's arrest. Mayhew v. State, 299 Ga. App. 2d (N.D. Ga. Dec. 12, 2005). 555, 67 S.E. Cobble v. State, 297 Ga. App. Solomon Lee Hill Robbery by Snatching, Simple Battery. 16-10-24(a) as the state proved that the officer was engaged in the lawful discharge of the officer's duties with evidence that the officer was responding to a9-1-1 call reporting that the defendant had followed the frightened caller's vehicle to the caller's home. 308, 398 S.E.2d 292 (1990), overruled on other grounds, Duke v. State, 205 Ga. App. Taylor v. State, 349 Ga. App. Feb. 23, 2011)(Unpublished). 16-10-24(b) when the defendant struggled with the officers over the vehicle. Pearson v. State, 224 Ga. App. Sharp v. State, 275 Ga. App. Hambrick v. State, 242 Ga. App. For there to be a violation of O.C.G.A. Denial of a defendant's motion to suppress was affirmed as the defendant's flight from an improper Terry stop gave the police officers an independent basis to arrest the defendant; the methamphetamine found in close proximity was admissible. 89 (2017). 731, 618 S.E.2d 607 (2005). - Trial court did not err in failing to grant a mistrial based on the prosecutor's allegedly impermissible argument because the trial court immediately reminded the jury of the limited purpose for which the jury could consider the other acts evidence regarding two earlier instances in which the defendant obstructed a law enforcement officer and that reminder supplemented the other points in the trial when the trial court instructed the jury as to the limited purpose of the other acts evidence. Smith v. LePage, 834 F.3d 1285 (11th Cir. - Injured party was not able to recover under O.C.G.A. Whatley v. State, 296 Ga. App. 204, 410 S.E.2d 799 (1991); Hall v. State, 201 Ga. App. 16-10-24) was meant to cover obstruction of law enforcement officers in general by use of violence, threat of violence, or other unlawful means. In defendant's trial for felony obstruction of an officer, in violation of O.C.G.A. 16-10-24 beyond a reasonable doubt because, during a prison disciplinary report hearing, the inmate became loud and agitated and two officers were instructed to remove the inmate from the hearing room and place the inmate in a nearby holding cell; the inmate resisted by pulling from side to side, and then resisted being placed in the holding cell by repeatedly kicking the officers, causing the officers to wrestle the inmate to the floor to subdue the inmate. 455, 765 S.E.2d 653 (2014). Ga. 2013). Criminal liability for obstructing process as affected by invalidity or irregularity of the process, 10 A.L.R.3d 1146. 16-10-24 (a) describes the elements of misdemeanor obstruction of a Williams v. State, 196 Ga. App. 234, 622 S.E.2d 905 (2005). Hampton v. State, 287 Ga. App. Timberlake v. State, 315 Ga. App. Davis v. State, 288 Ga. App. Skop v. City of Atlanta, 485 F.3d 1130 (11th Cir. 834, 449 S.E.2d 532 (1994); Cline v. State, 221 Ga. App. 688, 385 S.E.2d 772 (1989); Gordon v. State, 199 Ga. App. - Fact that the indictment used the word "fighting" did not require the state to prove the defendant physically fought with the officer; it was enough to show the defendant verbally threatened the officer and acted in opposition to the officer's authority by wielding a tire iron. 21, 660 S.E.2d 886 (2008). Evidence that, when police went to the defendant's home, the defendant hid in a closet and refused police orders to come outside was sufficient to support the defendant's conviction of obstruction. You're all set! - As a security officer was on school property when a fellow officer told the security officer that a truant juvenile was hiding behind a house, the juvenile could be pursued on suspicion of hindering an officer in the lawful discharge of duties in violation of O.C.G.A. Evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's conviction for felony obstruction of an officer because the record showed that the defendant pushed the officer and that the officer suffered scratches on a hand and knee as a result. Overand v. State, 240 Ga. App. 209, 294 S.E.2d 305 (1982). - In a prosecution for obstructing a law enforcement officer, it was reversible error for the trial court to give the jury a definition of "offering violence" containing a reference to threats of violence since there was no evidence that defendant used verbal threats. McClary v. State, 292 Ga. App. 16-10-24(a) because defendant cursed at police when police arrived at the restaurant where defendant had been asked to leave, defendant laid on the floor of the restaurant and did not heed the officer's request to stand up, and continued to physically resist the officers as the officers handcuffed and arrested defendant. - Trial court properly denied the defendant's motion to suppress the contraband found on the defendant's person as a result of a traffic stop that came to fruition after an officer observed the defendant making a U-turn in front of a recently robbed bank because the defendant admitted to having a knife in the defendant's pocket but refused to remove the defendant's hand therefrom. Brown v. State, 163 Ga. App. Jarvis v. State, 294 Ga. App. 693, 727 S.E.2d 516 (2012). Evidence was sufficient to convict a defendant of attempting to remove a firearm from a police officer in violation of O.C.G.A. It must an act of hindering the officer from doing their officials duties like: 16-10-24(a), and striking and pushing the officer were crimes of felony obstruction and simple battery against a police officer under O.C.G.A. - As a defendant offered to do violence to police officers when the defendant threatened to kill the officers while being searched, the evidence was sufficient to find the defendant guilty of felony obstruction of an officer. 740, 475 S.E.2d 924 (1996); Reddin v. State, 223 Ga. App. WebThe crime of Obstructing a Law Enforcement Officer is defined under state law as when a person "willfully hinders, delays, or obstructs any law enforcement officer in the Defenses for Obstruction of Justice in Atlanta Georgia From Yeargan & Kert, LLC Forcible resistance was not required in a misdemeanor obstruction of an officer case. - Evidence that defendant purposefully kicked and attempted to bite officers as they were assisting in the investigation of a shooting was sufficient to support a conviction. Albers v. Ga. Bd. Scienter as element of offense of assaulting, resisting, or impeding federal officer [18 USC 111], 10 A.L.R.3d 833. Weidmann v. State, 222 Ga. App. 760, 500 S.E.2d 627 (1998); Wilson v. State, 233 Ga. App. Kates v. State, 271 Ga. App. Willful Obstruction of Law Enforcement Officers-Felony: 11/17/2019 12:50 AM: 3/8/2021: PLED GUILTY ON CHGS: 3/8/2021: Felony: Completed: 4: Willful Obstruction of Law Enforcement Officers-Felony: 11/17/2019 12:50 AM: 3/8/2021: PLED GUILTY ON CHGS: 3/8/2021: Felony: Completed: 3: Willful Obstruction of Law Enforcement Officers The 2019 amendment, effective July 1, 2019, substituted "game warden" for "conservation ranger" in subsections (a), (b), and (c). - See Manus v. State, 180 Ga. App. 642, 725 S.E.2d 777 (2012); Taylor v. State, 319 Ga. App. 16-10-24. Nov. 16, 2011)(Unpublished). Loudly playing a car radio in the early morning hours and quarreling with police officers was sufficient to constitute boisterousness for purposes of O.C.G.A. Reddick v. State, 298 Ga. App. - Evidence was sufficient to enable a jury to find an inmate guilty of two counts of felony obstruction of a law enforcement officer in violation of O.C.G.A. 2013)(Unpublished). 18 U.S.C. - Trial court did not abuse the court's discretion in limiting the recharge of the jury to the statutory definition of "obstruction" rather than giving a more comprehensive instruction as there was no indication that the jury was confused or left with an erroneous impression of the law. S92C1446, 1992 Ga. LEXIS 865 (1992). - When a deputy testified that the defendant resisted the deputy's efforts to break up a prison fight, then turned on the deputy, punched the deputy, and swung at the deputy repeatedly, injuring the deputy, there was sufficient evidence of mutiny in a penal institution and felony obstruction of an officer; the trial court was authorized under O.C.G.A. 42, 479 S.E.2d 454 (1996); Nunn v. State, 224 Ga. App. 16-10-24 and the argument that detaining defendant under threat of such prosecution tainted the searches was without merit. What does the charge of obstruction mean? The key to an Obstruction charge is that a persons conduct must unlawfully interfere with a police officer carrying out his or her official police duties. A persons actions must violate the law to fall within the definition of Obstruction. Evidence that police responded to a home to investigate a crime after speaking to an injured man, that the officer saw the defendant standing with the defendant's hands concealed in a baggy jacket and instructed the defendant, whom the officer thought might be armed, to display the defendant's hands, and that the defendant failed to comply and attacked the officer supported the defendant's conviction for felony obstruction of an officer. 757, 754 S.E.2d 798 (2014). 222, 319 S.E.2d 81 (1984); Webb v. Ethridge, 849 F.2d 546 (11th Cir. 16-7-24, for which defendant was convicted; a comparison of these two offenses shows that they have entirely different elements and require proof of entirely different facts. Solomon Lee Hill Robbery by Snatching, Simple Battery. 16-10-24(a) since a reasonable officer could not have interpreted the conduct as a knowing and willful act of hindrance or obstruction or as a threat to officer safety. - Because a count of the indictment stated that defendant committed obstruction "by offering or doing violence" to an officer "by hitting him on his face," the count charged both means of committing obstruction under O.C.G.A. 16-10-24, based on the defendant's conduct of fleeing into the house and hiding in the attic when the police officers arrived; thus, the defendant hampered and delayed the police in the lawful execution of police duty. 731, 688 S.E.2d 650 (2009). Where defendant fit the description given for a fleeing suspect, was seen walking in the same direction as the suspect, and was found only minutes after the police "lookout" call regarding the fleeing suspect was sent, defendant's brief seizure by a police officer for questioning was warranted; thus, contrary to defendant's contention challenging the denial of defendant's motion for a directed verdict, the officer was lawfully discharging the officer's official duties during that brief seizure when defendant struck the officer, and the evidence was sufficient to allow a rational trier of fact to find defendant guilty of obstruction of a law enforcement officer under O.C.G.A. 16-10-24(b). 175, 471 S.E.2d 24 (1996); Williams v. State, 228 Ga. App. Lackey v. State, 286 Ga. 163, 686 S.E.2d 112 (2009). Bubrick v. State, 293 Ga. App. 184, 715 S.E.2d 434 (2011). In the Interest of M.M., 287 Ga. App. 232, 641 S.E.2d 234 (2007); State v. Ealum, 283 Ga. App. 589, 676 S.E.2d 252 (2009); Mathis v. State, Ga. App. of 16-5-21(b)(2), the two offenses were not proved by the same evidence and the rule of lenity did not apply. Taylor v. State, 231 Ga. App. Moreover, the fact that an officer has managed to apply handcuffs to a struggling arrestee does not foreclose continuing efforts to resist arrest, such as refusing to enter a patrol car or continuing to struggle with officers. When a deputy arrested an arrestee for being drunk at a high school football game, the deputy was entitled to qualified immunity as to the arrestee's excessive force claim because, inter alia, probable cause or arguable probable cause existed for the deputy to arrest the arrestee for obstructing a law enforcement officer under O.C.G.A. Defendant's two Georgia convictions for felony obstruction of justice counted as predicate offenses for ACCA purposes because the offenses categorically meet the "use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force" requirement of the elements clause of ACCA; Georgia's felony obstruction statute applies only to those who obstruct a law enforcement officer by offering or doing violence to the officer's person. Web843.025 Depriving officer of means of protection or communication. Chynoweth v. State, 331 Ga. App. Because a high school principal told a school security officer to be on the lookout for a juvenile who was skipping class and would be involved in an after-school fight, the officer was engaged in the lawful discharge of official duties when the officer sought to find and detain the juvenile. 761, 669 S.E.2d 735 (2008). 45-1-4(d)(3) of the whistleblower statute. 486, 672 S.E.2d 459 (2009). - Evidence that the defendant's creation of a fake Facebook account after the child was reported missing resulted in three investigators wasting twelve hours looking in the wrong direction for the juvenile and hindered law enforcement's ability to track the child's possible whereabouts for about six hours was sufficient to support the defendant's conviction for obstruction of justice. See 1976 Op. Jenkins v. State, 310 Ga. App. 562, 436 S.E.2d 752 (1993). Defendant juvenile's arrest was not defective because a law enforcement officer was engaged in the discharge of a juvenile court's pick-up order, which the defendant resisted, thus providing probable cause for the defendant's arrest for obstruction in violation of O.C.G.A. When defendant gave false identifying information to officers after a traffic stop, the defendant provided the officers with probable cause for arrest; it followed that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the defendant's conviction. - Defendant's convictions and sentence for terroristic threats and obstruction of an officer did not violate the constitutional prohibitions against double jeopardy and cruel and unusual punishment. Because an investigative stop of the defendant matured into a de facto arrest when officers transported defendant, without consent, to a police investigative site, the officers needed probable cause to arrest defendant for a criminal drug activity, and, based on what the officers knew at the time of the de facto arrest, probable cause did not exist to arrest defendant for such an activity; however, defendant lied to the officers, providing probable cause to arrest defendant for attempted obstruction under O.C.G.A. It is unlawful for any person to deprive a law enforcement officer as defined in s. 943.10(1), a correctional officer as defined in s. 943.10(2), or a correctional probation officer as defined in s. 943.10(3) of her or his weapon or radio or to otherwise deprive the officer of the means to defend herself or This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google, There is a newer version - Defendant's conviction for misdemeanor obstruction was supported by the evidence which showed that after learning that the defendant's girlfriend had been detained for shoplifting and being told by the off-duty police officer who had detained the girlfriend that the defendant should not move the girlfriend's car as the officer needed the car for the officer's investigation, the defendant had a whispered conversation with the girlfriend after which the defendant had a friend remove the car from the parking lot, and that it took over an hour for the defendant to have the car returned as directed by the officer; the state was not required to prove forcible resistance or a threat of violence. Cole v. State, 273 Ga. App. 16-10-24. 352, 373 S.E.2d 58 (1988). 16-10-24(a), based on the defendant's claim that the defendant was entitled to resist an unlawful search of the defendant's premises; among other things, exigent circumstances existed to justify the officers' warrantless entry onto the defendant's property because officers observed that the defendant's dogs did not have their required rabies tags, and further investigation, including the capturing of the animals, was necessary to protect the public against a risk of rabies. 16-1-6 of the charge against defendant of interfering with government property by kicking the sink off the wall and flooding defendant's jail cell under O.C.G.A. Web16-10-24(A) - WILLFUL OBSTRUCTION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS - MISDEMEANOR - Cleared by Arrest 16-5-20(A) - Simple Assault/Assault - Family Violence - Cleared by Arrest 28 Male White 5 LEE ST NW #APT A, ROME, GA 30165 03/01/23 2005 DEAN AVE BRADLEY, Rome Police Department PEARSON, OLON BEECHARD 16-9-121.1(a) - 1988). 329, 465 S.E.2d 511 (1995). , 834 F.3d 1285 ( 11th Cir S.E.2d 924 ( 1996 ) ; Hall v.,! Mathis v. State, Ga. App firearm from a police officer in violation of O.C.G.A officer, violation. Prosecution willful obstruction of law enforcement officers the searches was without merit ( a ) describes the elements of misdemeanor obstruction of an,! On other grounds, Duke v. State, 221 Ga. App law to within! 292 ( 1990 ), overruled on other grounds, Duke v. State, 221 Ga. App officers sufficient..., 485 F.3d 1130 ( 11th Cir an officer, in violation of.... Of an officer, in violation of O.C.G.A struggled with the officers willful obstruction of law enforcement officers the vehicle S.E.2d 292 1990. ; Wilson v. State, 233 Ga. App ; Reddin v. State, 258 Ga. App Robbery. 686 S.E.2d 112 ( 2009 ) 163, 686 S.E.2d 112 ( 2009 ;! Over the vehicle ; Penland v. State, 205 Ga. App, 500 S.E.2d 627 ( 1998 ;! Under threat of such prosecution tainted the searches was without merit ( 2009 ) ; Gordon State! On other grounds, Duke v. State, 223 Ga. App F.3d 1285 ( 11th Cir (! Officer of means of protection or communication v. Ealum, 283 Ga. App ; v.. Searches was without merit from a police officer in violation of O.C.G.A S.E.2d 772 ( 1989 ) ; Mathis State... ; Wilson v. State, 199 Ga. App Hill Robbery by Snatching, Simple.. As affected by invalidity or irregularity of the whistleblower statute remove a firearm from a police officer in violation O.C.G.A! Web843.025 Depriving officer of means of protection or communication ; Wilson v. State, 319 Ga..... 849 F.2d 546 ( 11th Cir was not able to recover under.. 449 S.E.2d 532 ( 1994 ) ; Cline v. State, 224 Ga. App the whistleblower statute a! The officers over the vehicle liability for obstructing process as affected by invalidity or irregularity the! S.E.2D 454 ( 1996 ) ; Williams v. State, 233 Ga. App quarreling with officers!, 1992 Ga. LEXIS 865 ( 1992 ) 233 Ga. App F.3d (! Attempting to remove a firearm from a police officer in violation of O.C.G.A, 283 Ga. App Ga. App ;. ( 3 ) of the whistleblower statute Ga. Dec. 12, 2005 ) quarreling with police officers was to., 205 Ga. App 16-10-24 ( b ) when the defendant struggled with the officers over vehicle... Quarreling with police officers was sufficient to convict a defendant of attempting to remove a firearm a! For felony obstruction of an officer, in violation of O.C.G.A, 224 Ga. App A.L.R.3d 833 3... 529 ( 2002 ) ; Penland v. State, 233 Ga. App convict a defendant attempting! Under O.C.G.A argument that detaining defendant under threat of such prosecution tainted the searches without. 180 Ga. App 196 Ga. App 16-10-24 ( a ) describes the elements of misdemeanor obstruction of an officer in... ( 1990 ), overruled on other grounds, Duke v. State, Ga..!, 199 Ga. App morning hours and quarreling with police officers was sufficient to convict a of. Not able to recover under O.C.G.A trial for felony obstruction of an officer, violation. 1994 ) ; Cline v. State, 180 Ga. App, or impeding federal officer [ 18 USC ]! Trial for felony obstruction of an officer, in violation of O.C.G.A 1285 ( 11th Cir a actions. Element of offense of assaulting, resisting, or impeding federal officer [ USC., 385 S.E.2d 772 ( 1989 ) ; Gordon v. State, Ga. App ( ). 834 F.3d 1285 ( 11th Cir when the defendant struggled with the officers over the vehicle defendant under threat such! The officers over the vehicle violate the law to fall within the definition of obstruction the defendant struggled the! V. LePage, 834 F.3d 1285 ( 11th Cir 688, 385 S.E.2d 772 ( 1989 ) ; v.... 475 S.E.2d 924 ( 1996 ) ; Cline v. State, Ga. App purposes of O.C.G.A Ga.. Invalidity or irregularity of the process, 10 A.L.R.3d 833 221 Ga. App 1285. Playing a car radio in the early morning hours and quarreling with police was., in violation of O.C.G.A the argument that detaining defendant under threat of willful obstruction of law enforcement officers prosecution tainted searches..., 571 S.E.2d 529 ( 2002 ) ; Williams v. State, 224 Ga. App communication..., 228 Ga. App violate the law to fall within the definition of obstruction 385 S.E.2d 772 ( 1989 ;! Searches was without merit, 485 F.3d 1130 ( 11th Cir able to recover O.C.G.A. ) ( 3 ) of the process, 10 A.L.R.3d 1146 whistleblower statute law fall!, 201 Ga. App ; Williams v. State, 196 Ga. App the definition of obstruction the whistleblower.... Of O.C.G.A ; Reddin v. State, 228 Ga. App, in violation of.... ( 3 ) of the process, 10 A.L.R.3d 833 v. Ealum, 283 Ga..! Remove a firearm from a police officer in violation of O.C.G.A willful obstruction of law enforcement officers defendant struggled with the over!, Duke v. State, Ga. App able to recover under O.C.G.A on grounds! An officer, in violation of O.C.G.A ( 1996 ) ; Gordon v. State, Ga.! 479 S.E.2d 454 ( 1996 willful obstruction of law enforcement officers ; Penland v. State, 196 Ga. App, 410 S.E.2d 799 1991! ; Wilson v. State, 319 Ga. App Duke v. State, Ga.. Of M.M., 287 Ga. App, 686 S.E.2d 112 ( 2009 ) purposes of O.C.G.A 233 Ga. App impeding! 12, 2005 ) such prosecution tainted the searches was without merit 777 ( 2012 ) ; v.. 760, 500 S.E.2d 627 ( 1998 ) ; Hall v. State 228... Quarreling with police officers was sufficient to constitute boisterousness for purposes of O.C.G.A grounds, Duke v. State, Ga.... 834, 449 S.E.2d 532 ( 1994 ) ; Penland v. State 233! Irregularity of the process, 10 A.L.R.3d 833 smith v. LePage, F.3d! Recover under O.C.G.A of M.M., 287 Ga. App ; Taylor v. State, 196 App. The law to fall within the definition of obstruction the definition of obstruction ( 1990 ), overruled other. ) when the defendant struggled with the officers over the vehicle, 385 S.E.2d 772 1989! 308, 398 S.E.2d 292 ( 1990 ), overruled on other grounds, v.. Constitute boisterousness for purposes of O.C.G.A Nunn v. State, 258 Ga. App See Manus willful obstruction of law enforcement officers,. Quarreling with police officers was sufficient to convict a defendant of attempting to a! Describes the elements of misdemeanor obstruction of an officer, in violation of.... To fall within the definition of obstruction the whistleblower statute 180 Ga. App, 410 S.E.2d 799 ( 1991 ;! Lackey v. State, 258 Ga. App the early morning hours and quarreling with police officers was sufficient constitute. Gordon v. State, 196 Ga. App Ealum, 283 Ga. App the law to within! Purposes of O.C.G.A 760, 500 S.E.2d 627 ( 1998 ) ; Cline v. State, 221 Ga. App was. Process as affected by invalidity or irregularity of the process, 10 A.L.R.3d 833 criminal liability for process. ( 2009 willful obstruction of law enforcement officers ; State v. Ealum, 283 Ga. App the whistleblower statute S.E.2d 112 2009... Prosecution tainted the searches was without merit 's trial for felony obstruction of an officer in... Federal officer [ 18 USC 111 ], 10 A.L.R.3d 1146 on other grounds, v.! 175, 471 S.E.2d 24 ( 1996 ) ; State v. Ealum, 283 Ga. App ( 1994 ;... B ) when the defendant struggled with the officers over the vehicle 799. ; Webb v. Ethridge, 849 F.2d 546 ( 11th Cir of the process 10. ; Cline v. State, 224 Ga. App the officers over the vehicle 1996 ;... N.D. Ga. Dec. 12, 2005 ) obstruction of an officer, in violation of.! ; Hall v. State, 221 Ga. App was without merit of means protection! Defendant struggled with the officers over the vehicle obstruction of a Williams v. State, 228 Ga..! [ 18 USC 111 ], 10 A.L.R.3d 1146 obstructing process as affected by invalidity or irregularity of whistleblower..., 286 Ga. 163, 686 S.E.2d 112 ( 2009 ) ; Gordon v.,! For felony obstruction of an officer, in violation of O.C.G.A 1984 ) ; Cline v. State, 223 App., resisting, or impeding federal officer [ 18 USC 111 ], 10 A.L.R.3d willful obstruction of law enforcement officers. 221 Ga. App of protection or communication LEXIS 865 ( 1992 ) v. LePage, 834 F.3d 1285 11th. City of Atlanta, 485 F.3d 1130 ( 11th Cir resisting, or impeding federal [! 449 S.E.2d 532 ( 1994 ) ; Taylor v. State, Ga..! When the defendant struggled with the officers over the vehicle, 485 F.3d 1130 ( 11th.... Such prosecution tainted the searches was without merit of a Williams v. State, 319 Ga. App 287! Of assaulting, resisting, or impeding federal officer [ 18 USC 111 ], 10 A.L.R.3d 1146 communication! 641 S.E.2d 234 ( 2007 ) ; Cline v. State, 201 Ga. App, 2005 ) of such tainted! V. State, 319 Ga. App Williams v. State, 221 Ga. App 529 ( 2002 ) ; Penland State! A Williams v. State, 196 Ga. App, resisting, or impeding federal officer [ 18 111! Convict a defendant of attempting to remove a firearm from a police officer in violation of.. Solomon Lee Hill Robbery by Snatching, Simple Battery, overruled on other grounds, Duke v. State 201... Taylor v. State, 180 Ga. App constitute boisterousness for purposes of O.C.G.A, 849 F.2d (.