Ga. Code Ann. § 16-5-21

Aggravated assault can be supported by evidence that a person stabbed and slashed at another with an ink pen.

In the Interest of I. B. · filed 2010-03-22(a)(2)

So viewed, the evidence shows that I. B. stabbed and slashed at one of his classmates with an ink pen. ... Accordingly, the evidence was sufficient to enable the juvenile court to find that I. B. committed an act that, had he been an adult, would have supported a conviction for aggravated assault.

An assault with a deadly weapon is aggravated assault; pointing a handgun at people can satisfy the statute by placing them in reasonable apprehension of immediate violent injury.

White v. State · filed 2011-02-22(a)(2)

A person commits aggravated assault if he commits assault “[w]ith a deadly weapon.” ... Overwhelming evidence adduced at trial, and summarized above, showed that White was at the scene, that White had a handgun in his possession, and that he drew his handgun and pointed it at Bryant, Lozano, and Newton as they were sitting in Bryant’s car, thereby placing them “in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury.”

Aggravated assault under subsection (a)(2) can support a conviction even if the jury found that the defendant used a replica or device having the appearance of a weapon.

Smith v. State · filed 2010-06-30(a)(2)

Even if we accept Smith’s argument, the jury was still authorized to find Smith guilty of the remaining counts even if they found a replica or device having the appearance of a weapon.

Hands and feet can satisfy § 16-5-21(a)(2) when their offensive use is likely to inflict serious bodily injury.

Morales v. State · filed 2010-08-12(a)(2)

Considering the degree of the victim’s injuries, the jury was also authorized to conclude that when used offensively Morales’s hands and feet were likely to inflict serious bodily injury.

Section 16-5-21(a) supports an aggravated assault conviction when the defendant fires a shotgun in a person's direction.

Cummings v. State · filed 2010-10-06(a)

Given the foregoing, we find that any rational trier of fact could find beyond a reasonable doubt that Cummings committed aggravated assault by firing the shotgun in the direction of Williams as alleged in the indictment.

A BB gun can support aggravated assault with intent to rob when it appears deadly to the victim.

Davis v. State · filed 2010-10-13(a)(1)

In this case, the fact that Davis used a BB gun instead of one that uses bullets is immaterial; the true test is whether it appeared to W C. that the weapon was deadly, even though the weapon was not actually capable of inflicting deadly harm.

Firing a handgun into a crowd that includes the victim can establish aggravated assault under subsection (a)(2).

Watkins v. State · filed 2010-11-10(a)(2)

Thomas was found guilty of this offense because there was evidence that he assaulted the victim by firing a handgun into the crowd of which the victim was a part.

Hands used to choke a victim can satisfy the deadly weapon element of aggravated assault.

Whitley v. State · filed 2011-01-19(a)(2)

If the assault is committed with a deadly weapon, the defendant is guilty of aggravated assault, OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2), and “[t]he use of hands to choke a victim satisfies the deadly weapon . . . element of the aggravated assault statute.” ... For these reasons, the evidence plainly was sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find Whitley guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and battery.

An assault falls within subsection (a)(2) when a person swings at another while holding a screwdriver in the same hand.

Davis v. State · filed 2011-02-17(a)(2)

The evidence thus showed that Davis’s assault upon Hill was “with a . . . [screwdriver]” within the purview of the aggravated assault statute.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon is supported when a person approaches a victim holding a knife and causes the victim to fear for his safety and flee.

Graves v. State · filed 2011-04-12(a)(2)

The evidence supports the aggravated assault conviction. Graves quickly approached Bailey while holding a knife, after already having confronted him once, urging Bailey to “come on” and causing Bailey to fear for his safety and run away.

Holding a knife against a victim’s stomach while demanding property is sufficient to establish aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Harrelson v. State · filed 2011-11-18(a)(2)

The victim’s testimony that Poss held a knife against his stomach while he demanded the victim’s wallet and keys to the vehicle sufficed to prove the commission of an aggravated assault.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon is supported when displaying the weapon places the victim in reasonable apprehension of immediate harm.

Campbell v. State · filed 2012-02-22(a)(2)

Campbell asserted ownership of the car and displayed a deadly weapon when Carter resisted. Carter’s act in grabbing the gun and in tussling with the man who held it indicates a reasonable apprehension of harm, and Carter suffered serious injury from the shot.

Hands or feet can be deadly weapons under § 16-5-21(a)(2), depending on how they are used and the injuries the victim suffers.

In Re Qs · filed 2011-06-16(a)(2)

Whether hands or feet constitute a deadly weapon in a particular case is a question for the trier of fact, considering all the relevant circumstances, including the way in which the hands or feet were used and the injuries actually suffered by the victim.

Under § 16-5-21(a)(2), hands or feet may be deadly weapons depending on how they were used and the injuries the victim suffered.

In the Interest of Q. S. · filed 2011-06-16(a)(2)

Whether hands or feet constitute a deadly weapon in a particular case is a question for the trier of fact, considering all the relevant circumstances, including the way in which the hands or feet were used and the injuries actually suffered by the victim.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon does not require proof that the assault involved taking property belonging to or held by a bank.

Palmer v. State · filed 2012-04-05(a)(2)

Similarly, although it is unlawful in Georgia to commit aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, ... no such crime exists in Georgia as to commit an aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and, in doing so, to take any property belonging to, or in the care, custody, control, management, or possession of, any bank.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon can be proved by the victim’s testimony that the defendant held a knife while threatening her; a wound is not required.

Ellis v. State · filed 2012-06-25(a)(2)

The victim testified that Ellis held a knife in his hand when he told her to take her clothes off, and when he told her to open her legs so that he could have vaginal intercourse with her against her will. This testimony alone was sufficient to support the conviction. ... The fact that there was no evidence of a wound to the victim’s thighs does not change our conclusion.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) uses “deadly weapon” as a general term that includes an object, device, or instrument used offensively in a way likely to cause or actually causing serious bodily injury.

Green v. State · filed 2012-06-25(a)(2)

However, this latter language is included in the phrase “deadly weapon” when that phrase is used as a general reference to the aggravating circumstance in OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2).

A large knife can qualify as a deadly weapon for aggravated assault even while sheathed if the jury may find it could be easily removed from its sheath.

Gunter v. State · filed 2012-06-28(a)(2)

Here, the jury was authorized to conclude that the large knife held by Gunter, which itself was introduced into evidence, was a deadly weapon and that it could be easily removed from its sheath.

Hands and feet may qualify as deadly weapons under § 16-5-21(a)(2) depending on the circumstances of their use, including the victim’s injuries.

Lewis v. State · filed 2012-06-18(a)(2)

Although hands and feet are not considered per se deadly weapons within the meaning of OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2), the jury may find them to be so depending on the circumstances surrounding their use, including the extent of the victim’s injuries.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers an offensive weapon under the armed robbery statute because that weapon falls within the objects, devices, or instruments described by the aggravated assault provision.

Jackson v. State · filed 2012-07-03(a)(2)

And we have noted that the definition of “offensive weapon” applicable to armed robbery “mirrors very closely” the definition of aggravated assault set forth in OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2), and that an “offensive weapon” under the armed robbery statute “necessarily wouldfall within the category of weapons described in OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2).” ... Hence, Jackson cannot demonstrate that the giving of the “offensive weapon” definition drawn from the pattern instructions on armed robbery likely had any effect on the jury’s decision to convict him of aggravated assault or burglary with the intent to commit an aggravated assault, and, therefore, cannot establish plain error.

For aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, when the jury is instructed only on attempted violent injury, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant attempted to injure the victim.

Touchstone v. State · filed 2012-12-19(a)(2)

Thus, although the indictment and governing law may have authorized the jury to convict Touchstone based on either OCGA § 16-5-20 (a) (1) or OCGA § 16-5-20 (a) (2), we agree with Touchstone that, pursuant to the trial court’s instructions, the jury was authorized to convict him of aggravated assault only if it was established beyond a reasonable doubt that he attempted to commit a violent injury to Billups.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) supports a conviction for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon when the defendant threatens to cut someone and hits that person while holding a razor blade.

Griffin v. State · filed 2013-01-22(a)(2)

As stated above, the evidence showed Griffin threatened to cut Rosson and hit him with a razor blade in his hand. This evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find Griffin guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crime of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers assault with a deadly weapon likely to cause or actually causing serious bodily injury; evidence of gunfire and armed participation can support a conviction.

Jordan v. State · filed 2013-03-11(a)(2)

OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2) provides, in pertinent part, that “[a] person commits the offense of aggravated assault when he or she assaults . . . [w]ith a deadly weapon . . . which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury.” Here, it is clear from the victims’ testimony that guns were used in the commission of these serious crimes. The physical evidence, including a bullet found by police and bullet holes in the ceiling and mattress, also show that the intruders used guns.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) permits an aggravated-assault conviction based on a dog attack when evidence shows the defendant commanded the dog to attack.

Braziel v. State · filed 2013-02-26(a)(2)

The officer who was assaulted testified that Braziel yelled to his dog “sic him boy, bite him” before the dog attacked the officer. Another deputy testified that the dog had been aggressive in past encounters at Braziel’s home, but that “Braziel ha[d] usually called it off.” Despite Braziel’s contentions otherwise, this evidence was sufficient to authorize the jury’s finding that appellant was guilty of aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers assault with a deadly weapon; evidence that a gun was pointed at victims can support an aggravated assault conviction.

Veasey v. State · filed 2013-07-02(a)(2)

Under OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2) a person commits the offense of aggravated assault when he or she assaults with ... a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury. ... The evidence as to these four counts of aggravated assault was sufficient to sustain the convictions.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) makes an assault committed with a deadly weapon an aggravated assault.

Marshall v. State · filed 2013-10-25(a)(2)

Under OCGA § 16-5-21 (a), a person can commit the offense of aggravated assault in several ways, one of them being to commit an assault with a deadly weapon.

When a handgun is used as a bludgeon, aggravated assault requires proof that it was a deadly weapon in the circumstances of its use.

Byrd v. State · filed 2013-11-20(a)(2)

To convict Byrd of aggravated assault as indicted, the State was required to prove that the handgun was used as a deadly weapon. ... In Count 3, however, the handgun was not alleged to have been used in the ordinary manner in which a gun is used; it was alleged to have been used as a bludgeon or club.

Under § 16-5-21(a)(2), a jury may decide whether scissors, as used against a person, were likely to cause serious bodily injury.

Bradley v. State · filed 2013-07-01(a)(2)

The scissors were displayed for the jury, which was authorized to determine whether they were an “object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to . . . result in serious bodily injury.” OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2).

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) permits an aggravated assault conviction when fists are used in a manner likely to cause serious bodily injury; proof of a deadly weapon is not required on that basis.

Ferguson v. State · filed 2013-07-01(a)(2)

However, “subsection [(a) (2) of OCGA § 16-5-21] is a disjunctive clause that provides alternative bases for conviction. Since the indictment charged that [Ferguson’s] fists were likely to result in serious bodily injury, no reference to, or evidence of, a deadly weapon was required at trial.”

Pepper spray used offensively may qualify as an instrument likely to cause serious bodily injury when it causes burning, substantial pain, and temporary blindness.

Weaver v. State · filed 2013-11-20(a)(2)

Here, the State’s proffer showed that the victim suffered a burning sensation in his eyes and face, was in a great deal of pain, and was temporarily blinded. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by concluding that this evidence supported a guilty plea to aggravated assault based upon the use of “any object, device or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to . . . result in serious bodily injury.” OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2).

An assault committed with a deadly weapon is aggravated assault, and the victim’s testimony that the defendant held her at gunpoint can alone support a conviction.

Lambert v. State · filed 2014-01-24(a)(2)

If the assault is committed “with a deadly weapon,” the defendant is guilty of aggravated assault. ... The testimony of the victim, standing alone, was sufficient to sustain Lambert’s conviction for aggravated assault.

Firing a handgun toward officers who reasonably fear being shot can support a finding of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

In the Interest Of: T. D. J., Jr., a Child · filed 2014-02-21(a)(2)

Some of the shots were fired in Grant’s direction, which placed Grant in reasonable apprehension of being shot. ... Construed in favor of the prosecution, the above evidence was sufficient to support a finding of guilt on six counts of aggravated assault and one count of possession of a handgun by an underage person. See OCGA §§ 16-5-21 (a) (2) (aggravated assault with a deadly weapon); 16-11-132 (b) (possession of a handgun by a minor).

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) defines aggravated assault to include an assault with a deadly weapon.

Trammell v. State · filed 2014-07-09(a)(2)

Under Georgia law, a person commits the offense of aggravated assault when that person commits an assault with a deadly weapon.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) lets a jury decide whether the circumstances of an ordinary object's offensive use made it likely to cause serious bodily injury.

Hendrix v. State · filed 2014-08-13(a)(2)

As to whether the table was dangerous and likely to cause serious injury when used offensively, it is well settled that when an object is not considered an offensive weapon per se, a jury must determine whether the State has shown that the circumstances under which the object was used caused it to function, when used offensively, in a way likely to result in serious bodily injury.

A handgun used to strike someone can be a deadly weapon depending on how it is used, and the State must prove that element.

Howell v. State · filed 2015-02-18(b)(2)

Although we agree that the trial court’s charge would have been error if it had stated that the use of a gun in committing an assault would always constitute an aggravated assault, this it did not do. The jury was told that the State must prove that the assault was with a deadly weapon and that a handgun could be one, depending on how it was used. The jury was free to decide either way.

Under § 16-5-21(b)(2), a jury may find aggravated assault when a person strikes another’s head with his fists while wearing handcuffs.

Young v. the State · filed 2015-05-20(b)(2)

The evidence in this case authorized a finding that Young committed the offense of aggravated assault against the victim. There was evidence that he struck her in the head with his fists while wearing handcuffs.

Section 16-5-21(b)(2) covers chasing victims while holding a gun, even if it is pointed down, when the conduct puts them in reasonable apprehension of immediate violent injury.

In the Interest Of: S.W. , a Child · filed 2016-05-16(b)(2)

The elements of aggravated assault relevant to this case are (1) assault (2) with a deadly weapon.... Although the victims testified that S.W. was pointing the gun down and not at them, S. W.’s conduct was sufficient to place them in reasonable... apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon requires an assault committed with a deadly weapon.

In the Interest of S. W. · filed 2016-05-16(b)(2)

The elements of aggravated assault relevant to this case are (1) assault (2) with a deadly weapon.

Under the pre-2014 version of § 16-5-21(a)(2), choking a victim with one’s hands can support an aggravated assault conviction.

Goodrum v. the State · filed 2016-03-11(a)(2)

As discussed in Division 2, however, even before the legislature amended OCGA § 16-5-21 in 2014, using hands to choke a victim could support an aggravated assault conviction.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers hands used offensively as deadly weapons when their use is likely to cause or actually causes serious bodily injury.

Hicks v. State · filed 2016-06-27(a)(2)

A person commits the offense of aggravated assault when he uses a deadly weapon or object – in this case his hands – which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually results in serious bodily injury.

Section 16-5-21(b)(2) covers a motorcycle used offensively in a way likely to cause serious bodily injury.

Newby v. the State · filed 2016-09-12(b)(2)

The prosecution’s charge, which referred to the motorcycle as “an object which when used offensively against another is likely to cause serious bodily injury,” was also correct.

A jury may infer that a knife was used as a deadly weapon from the knife and evidence of the victim’s wounds.

Hillsman v. the State · filed 2017-06-05(a)(2)

Thus, the jury was authorized to infer from the evidence that the knife was used as a deadly weapon.

Fists can support an aggravated assault conviction when used offensively in a way likely to cause serious bodily injury.

Shaw v. the State · filed 2017-03-15(b)(2)

The evidence was also sufficient to convict Shaw of aggravated assault as alleged in the indictment — by using his fists to beat the victim in the head and face, “said act placing said victim in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury and causing bruising, swelling, and dizziness.”

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers an assault in which a person attempts to strike another’s head with a metal water pump capable of causing serious bodily injury.

Simmons v. the State · filed 2017-09-21(a)(2)

Additionally, evidence that Simmons attempted to use a metal water pump to hit the Victim on the back of the head satisfies the requirement in the aggravated assault statute that he carry out the assault by using a device capable of inflicting a serious bodily injury.

Brass knuckles used to strike a person can qualify as an object likely to cause serious bodily injury under the aggravated assault statute.

Hughes v. State · filed 2018-03-12(a)(2)

When used as Harris did during the incident in the pizzeria, the jury was authorized to find that brass knuckles qualify, at a minimum, as an object, device, or instrumentality that is likely to cause serious bodily injury.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon requires a simple assault, use of a deadly weapon or an object likely to cause serious bodily injury when used offensively, and general criminal intent.

Miller v. State · filed 2019-02-18(a)(2)

A conviction for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon requires proof of a simple assault, with the use of a deadly weapon (or an object that when used offensively is likely to result in serious bodily injury), and with general criminal intent.

A handgun used to strike someone in the head can satisfy the deadly weapon element of aggravated assault when the blows cause serious wounds.

Gonzalez v. State · filed 2019-05-29(a)(2)

As in Howell, there was overwhelming evidence to establish that the handgun constituted a deadly weapon. The evidence was undisputed that the victim was struck several times in the head with the handgun, which resulted in open, bleeding wounds.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers an assault with a deadly weapon or an object used offensively that is likely to cause, or does cause, serious bodily injury.

Boyd v. State · filed 2019-06-24(a)(2)

“A person commits the offense of aggravated assault when he or she assaults . . . [w]ith a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury[.]” OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2).

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) permits proof of aggravated assault without definitively identifying the object or instrument that caused the injuries.

King v. State · filed 2018-08-27(a)(2)

That the State was unable to definitively identify the object or instrument that caused the head injuries does not render the evidence insufficient to prove aggravated assault.

For aggravated assault, the jury may decide whether a handgun used to strike someone was a deadly weapon based on how it was used.

Gonzalez v. State · filed 2019-05-29

The jury was free to decide that a firearm, when not used as such, is not a deadly weapon.

Throwing a ten pound wooden chair at an officer who must evade it and fears violent injury can support an aggravated assault adjudication under § 16-5-21(a)(2).

In the Interest of I. H., a Child · filed 2019-06-11(a)(2)

Here, the evidence showed that I. H. picked up an approximately ten pound wooden chair and threw it at the officer. The officer testified he was apprehensive that he would receive a violent injury when I. H. threw the chair and that he had to make an evasive move to prevent the chair from hitting him. Accordingly, there was sufficient evidence to sustain I. H.’s adjudication for aggravated assault on a peace officer.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) treats intentionally firing a gun toward another person as aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Bashir v. State · filed 2019-06-24(a)(2)

Bashir admitted to intentionally firing a gun in the victims’ direction, which is conduct that would constitute aggravated assault.

Intentionally firing a gun toward people is sufficient to support an aggravated assault conviction.

Bashir v. State · filed 2019-06-24(a)(2)

A jury could find from this evidence that Bashir had intentionally fired the gun in the three victims' direction. ... So the evidence was sufficient to support Bashir's convictions for aggravated assault.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers a killing resulting from felony aggravated assault with a deadly weapon when the defendant points a gun at the victim and repeatedly shoots him.

Cheeves v. State · filed 2019-08-05(a)(2)

Here, the evidence at trial revealed only a killing resulting from felony aggravated assault with a deadly weapon (see OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2) ), not a death that proximately resulted from Cheeves "consciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk that his act or omission w[ould] cause harm or endanger the safety of [Henderson] and [that] the disregard constitute[d] a gross deviation from the standard of care which a reasonable person would [have] exercise[d] in the situation." OCGA § 16-5-60 (b).

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) makes a simple assault committed with a deadly weapon an aggravated assault.

Tyre Gay v. State · filed 2019-09-23(a)(2)

A person is chargeable with aggravated assault under OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2) when he commits the offense of simple assault with a deadly weapon. ... We conclude that the record contains evidence from which a jury could find that Gay was, at the very least, a party to the crimes involving Thomas and Obidoh, and thus Gay’s insufficient evidence claim fails.

Pointing a revolver at someone without justification constitutes aggravated assault when it places that person in reasonable apprehension of being shot.

Rammage v. State · filed 2020-01-27(a)(2)

Even if Appellant’s revolver accidentally discharged because of his trembling hand, he committed aggravated assault by pointing his revolver at Johnson without justification.

A factfinder may find that a butcher knife used to charge at people is a deadly weapon under the aggravated assault statute.

In the Interest of J.H., a Child v. State · filed 2020-03-13(a)(2)

In light of the testimony here that J. H. charged at his sister and her boyfriend with a butcher knife, the evidence supports the juvenile court’s finding that the knife constituted a deadly weapon.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers an assault committed by driving a vehicle toward a person in a way likely to cause serious bodily injury, even when the person avoids being hit.

Miller v. State · filed 2019-09-23(a)(2)

Under OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2), a person commits the offense of aggravated assault when “he or she assaults . . . [w]ith a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury[.]” ... Indeed, the evidence shows that Miller drove the stolen white van directly toward Deputies Montford and Hogan when they attempted to detain him, only missing them when they dove out of the way. ... Given these circumstances, the evidence was sufficient to support Miller’s aggravated-assault convictions.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers an assault with an object used offensively that actually causes serious bodily injury, including death.

Eberhart v. State · filed 2019-10-31(a)(2)

The evidence here plainly was sufficient to support Appellant’s felony murder conviction based on an assault with an object that, when used offensively against Towns, actually did result in serious bodily injury, which includes death.

Intentionally firing a gun at another person without justification can support an aggravated assault conviction.

Hamlette v. State · filed 2020-02-14(a)(2)

Suffice it to say, intentionally firing a gun at another person, absent justification, may be “sufficient in and of itself to support a conviction of aggravated assault.”

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) permits an aggravated assault conviction when a person points a handgun at another and threatens to kill them.

Prescott v. State · filed 2020-10-30(a)(2)

Aggravated assault also occurs when a person assaults another with a deadly weapon. OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2) (2013). The State charged Prescott with pointing a handgun at the victim. The victim testified that Prescott first pointed a handgun at her when they were traveling to his residence from their third date. Thereafter, the victim described other occasions when Prescott pointed a handgun at her, including when Prescott forced her into a shower, closed the curtain, pointed the handgun at her, and threatened to kill her. This evidence is sufficient to support Prescott’s conviction for aggravated assault.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) permits an aggravated assault conviction based on punching and kicking when the use of hands and feet is likely to cause serious bodily injury.

Smith v. State · filed 2020-05-04(a)(2)

Given these circumstances, the evidence was sufficient to support Smith’s conviction on the charge of aggravated assault upon Deputy Fleming,12 or at the very least, that ... he was party to that crime.13 Accordingly, the trial court did not err in denying Smith’s motion for new trial as to that issue.

Hands and feet can qualify as deadly weapons under aggravated assault when their use is likely to cause serious bodily injury; the State need not prove that serious injury occurred.

Tyson v. State · filed 2021-02-16(a)(2)

The State, however, is not required to prove that the victim sustained a serious injury. Rather, it need only prove that given the way in which the defendant’s hands and feet were used against the victim, she was likely to receive “serious bodily injury.”

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers an assault with an object used offensively when the object is likely to cause, or actually causes, serious bodily injury.

Chadwick v. State · filed 2021-07-01(a)(2)

Chadwick was charged with aggravated assault, which is committed when “he or she assaults . . . [w]ith a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury[.]” OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2).

A jury may decide whether a fist used to strike someone was a deadly weapon under § 16-5-21(a)(2).

Redding v. State · filed 2020-06-16(a)(2)

Whether a fist was used as a deadly weapon in a particular case is for the jury to decide.

Shooting a person with a handgun can establish probable cause for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Rahmaan v. McQuilkin · filed 2022-09-30(a)(2)

The shooting of Palmer with a handgun showed probable cause for an aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and served as the predicate for the felony murder offense.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) requires proof that the way hands and feet were used was likely to cause serious bodily injury; actual serious bodily injury is unnecessary.

Espinosa-Herrera v. State · filed 2021-09-15(a)(2)

In addition, the State was required to prove only that the way in which Espinosa-Herrera used her hands and feet against A. R. was likely to result in serious bodily injury, not that it actually caused such injury.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers an object used offensively when the circumstances show that it caused or was likely to cause serious bodily injury.

Huff v. State · filed 2021-11-08(a)(2)

These circumstances authorized the jury to find that Huff used the hammer offensively against the victim in a way that did or was likely to cause serious bodily injury as contemplated by the aggravated assault statute.

For aggravated assault under subsection (a)(2), the jury considers how an object was used when deciding whether it was likely to cause serious bodily injury.

Bristol Smith v. State · filed 2022-02-11(a)(2)

Here, the trial court’s instruction “substantially covered the principle that the jury should consider the manner and means of the object’s use.”

Striking a victim’s head with hands and fists and knocking her unconscious can support an aggravated assault conviction.

Josh Martin v. State · filed 2021-11-08(a)(2)

From this evidence, the jury was authorized to find Martin guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of aggravated assault (family violence) for using his hands and fists to strike the victim.

Aggravated assault with an instrument likely to cause serious bodily injury does not require proof of actual bodily injury.

Demeritte v. State · filed 2022-02-10(a)(2)

“Moreover, even if we assume that trial counsel’s performance was objectively unreasonable, [Demeritte] has failed to demonstrate prejudice[ ]”11 as aggravated assault does not require actual bodily injury.12 Thus, the State did not have to actually prove that M. D. sustained severe bodily injuries during the altercation.

A moving car can qualify as an offensive instrument under § 16-5-21(a)(2) when the defendant uses it to drag a person along pavement.

Deras Deonta Brooks v. State · filed 2022-04-29(a)(2)

Concomitantly, the jury was authorized to conclude that, based on this manner of use, the vehicle was an “object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury” and that Brooks was guilty of aggravated assault.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon does not require the weapon to be pointed directly at each victim; its use must place the victim in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury.

Garcia-Jarquin v. State · filed 2022-09-07(a)(2)

Contrary to Appellant’s assertion, “OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2)[ ] does not require the deadly weapon to have been pointed directly at each victim, but merely that the defendant use the deadly weapon in such manner as to place another in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury.” Green v. State, 304 Ga. 385, 388 (1) (a) (818 SE2d 535) (2018) (citation and punctuation omitted).

Shooting someone with a firearm constitutes aggravated assault with a deadly weapon under subsection (a)(2).

Priest v. State · filed 2025-09-16(a)(2)

The State represented that multiple witnesses heard Appellant tell Moore to “pop” (i.e., shoot) Frasier, which she then did. Taken as true, the prosecutor’s representations show that Moore committed aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Striking someone with a loaded gun constitutes aggravated assault under subsection (a)(2), a felony.

Chambliss v. State · filed 2023-12-19(a)(2)

That specific act would amount to aggravated assault, see OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2),5 a felony, see OCGA § 16-5-21 (b).

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) permits an aggravated assault conviction when an object used against a person is likely to cause serious bodily injury, even if no injury occurs.

Fraga v. State · filed 2024-04-17(a)(2)

In this case, the jury was authorized to conclude that the defendant’s conduct in placing a burning object on his girlfriend’s leg was likely to cause serious injury. The fact that no serious injury occurred does not mandate a contrary conclusion.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) can cover hot grease used to assault someone; an object’s liquid form does not exclude it.

Harvey v. State · filed 2024-10-04(a)(2)

We do not find persuasive appellant’s argument that the relative viscosity of the substance that was used as a weapon has any bearing on whether the instrumentality used to assault another person qualifies as an “object” under OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2). Similarly, whether the object used to assault another person was a solid, liquid or gas is also immaterial in this analysis.

Section 16-5-21 (a) (2) covers pointing a firearm at someone when it places that person in reasonable apprehension of immediate violent injury.

Zelaya v. State · filed 2025-09-02(a)(2)

The only question was whether the officers were in reasonable apprehension of immediate violent injury, and the facts demonstrate that they clearly were in this case. The evidence was sufficient to support Zelaya’s convictions for aggravated assault against Bond and Guest.

Aggravated assault under subsection (a)(4) includes assault with an object that, when used offensively, is likely to cause serious bodily injury.

Burks v. State · filed 2025-10-21(a)(4)

The crime of aggravated assault, as charged in the indictment, is committed when a person assaults another with an object which, when used offensively against a person is likely to result in serious bodily injury. ... From this evidence, a reasonable jury could have inferred that Burks acted in concert with Tapley to commit the crime of aggravated assault against Caleb and, thus, there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding that Burks was guilty of felony murder beyond a reasonable doubt as a party to a crime.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) requires proof that the object, as used under the circumstances, was likely to cause serious bodily injury; the evidence about the nail clippers did not meet that burden.

In the Interest of K.R., a Child · filed 2025-11-03(a)(2)

Given the great-grandmother’s uncontradicted testimony and the otherwise sparse record regarding the circumstances of the nail clippers incident, we conclude that the evidence was insufficient to authorize a reasonable factfinder to find beyond a reasonable doubt that the nail clippers were an object likely to result in serious bodily injury.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers an assault with an object used in a manner likely to cause serious bodily injury or death.

Pittman v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance · filed 1995-09-07(a)(2)

The Court finds as a matter of law that a two foot long, three inch in diameter log swung like a bat by a man weighing more than 200 pounds is a deadly weapon because, used in such a manner, it is likely to cause serious bodily injury or death.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) requires an assault with a deadly weapon, including an object made deadly by the way it is used.

United States v. Morales-Alonso · filed 2018-01-05(a)(2)

As clarified in Green and reiterated in Easter, the Georgia Supreme Court has defined the essential elements of a conviction for aggravated assault under O.C.G.A. § 16-5-21(a)(2) to include (1) an assault (2) that is committed either with a per se deadly weapon or with an “object, device, or instrument” that constitutes a deadly weapon because of the manner in which it is used in a particular case. Use of a deadly weapon must be shown for the conviction in Georgia.

Section 16-5-21 requires an assault for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon; possession of the weapon alone does not suffice.

Petouvis v. State · filed 1983-02-10

Contrary to defendant’s assertion, the second portion of the charge required the jury to determine whether an assault was committed in the fashion alleged and did not authorize the jury to convict him merely for possession of the weapon.

Aggravated assault under subsection (a) can involve intent to murder, so aggravated assault and murder charges are legally compatible.

Williams v. State · filed 1983-02-16(a)

However, “[a] person commits aggravated assault when he assaults (1) with intent to murder, to rape, or to rob, or (2) with a deadly weapon....” OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (Code Ann. § 26-1302). Thus, the two charges are not legally incompatible.

Section 16-5-21(a) does not require the state to locate bullets, bullet holes or expended shells to establish aggravated assault.

Radford v. State · filed 1983-05-12(a)

As for the second assault, it is not essential for the state to locate bullets, bullet holes or expended shells to establish the crime of aggravated assault. OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (Code Ann. § 26-1302).

Aggravated assault includes an assault with intent to rob or with an object used offensively in a way likely to cause serious bodily injury; a pocketknife can qualify depending on its use.

Hambrick v. State · filed 1985-04-02

We next consider Hambrick’s conviction for aggravated assault. A person commits such offense when he assaults with intent to rob or with a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury. OCGA § 16-5-21. ... Here again, appellant argues a lack of intent and the innocuous nature of the knife in question. For the reasons given above, we find this to be without merit. A directed verdict was not demanded, and an application of the test recited above, as set by Jackson and Boyd, affirm the verdict as legally authorized.

Aggravated assault by pointing a pistol is complete before a later robbery, so the two acts can support separate convictions.

Taylor v. State · filed 1986-01-31(a)(2)

However, the crime of aggravated assault (OCGA §§ 16-5-21 (a) (2) and 16-5-20 (a) (2)) was completed before Taylor robbed the victims in that he pointed the pistol at him right at the outset, before the trip to the kitchen and the subsequent robbery.

Section 16-5-21 permits an aggravated-assault conviction when a driver crosses the centerline with intent to injure another person, even if the driver also intended to injure himself.

Anderson v. State · filed 1985-06-19

In his brief the defendant concedes “that should the evidence indicate that he drove the automobile across the centerline with an intent to injure, then he could be guilty of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.” We agree with this statement and conclude under the evidence presented, a rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime of aggravated assault on James Savage, Jackson v. Virginia, supra. We reject the defendant’s contention that the evidence conclusively shows he did not intend to injure Mr. Savage, but only intended to injure himself.

Section 16-5-21 does not require a victim to be aware of the assault.

Stevens v. State · filed 1985-10-28

This issue was decided adversely to appellant in ... which states: “Awareness is not an essential element of the crime of aggravated assault.”

For the type of aggravated assault charged, the inquiry is the means by which the defendant attempted to inflict injury.

Jackson v. State · filed 1987-05-18

The acquittal of appellant of aggravated assault upon a peace officer does not compel a different conclusion, since in aggravated assault of the type charged in the indictment, we look to the means by which one attempted to inflict injury; in mutiny, to the intended result.

An aggravated assault based on an attempt to inflict violent injury cannot support a separate criminal-attempt conviction, because that would be an attempt to attempt the offense.

Patterson v. State · filed 1989-07-10

Because Stiles was unquestionably asleep or passed out on the creek bank during the time relevant to this count, he could not have been placed in apprehension of receiving an injury, and thus the assault charged in Count II perforce must have been based upon the attempt theory. Consequently, Patterson was charged with and prosecuted for the criminal attempt to attempt to commit a violent injury to Dennis Stiles with a deadly weapon. ... Accordingly, we must reverse Patterson’s conviction of Count II and its sentence.

Section 16-5-21 does not distinguish between offensive and defensive threats of immediate bodily harm.

Davis v. State · filed 1987-09-15

But the statute does not differentiate between offensive and defensive threats of immediate bodily harm. OCGA § 16-5-21.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon does not require an intent to cause death.

Johnson v. State · filed 1987-11-17(a)(2)

But one need not intend death in order to be convicted of aggravated assault.

Pushing a victim into a table, without more, does not establish aggravated assault with an offensive weapon or intent to rob.

Williams v. State · filed 1991-11-26(a)

Although the defendant admits he struck the victim, the facts he admitted are insufficient to prove aggravated assault or robbery. The acts admitted by defendant do not establish assault with an offensive weapon or assault with intent to rob. See OCGA § 16-5-21 (a).

A finding of aggravated assault under § 16-5-21 based on this stabbing required intentional infliction of injury, which precluded criminal negligence for reckless conduct.

Sheats v. State · filed 1993-10-21

The jury’s finding that Sheats committed aggravated assault ... under OCGA § 16-5-21 required a finding of an intentional infliction of injury, which precluded the element of criminal negligence in reckless conduct under OCGA § 16-5-60.

Firing at a victim while fleeing with her belongings can support a finding of aggravated assault with intent to rob under § 16-5-21(a)(1).

Jones v. State · filed 1991-01-24(a)(1)

We find no merit in appellant’s argument. The uncontroverted evidence showed that at the time he fired at the victim, appellant was fleeing her house with her belongings, including the very pistol used in the assault. See Moore v. State, 190 Ga. App. 278, 282 (3) (378 SE2d 880) (1989). “The jury was authorized to conclude that appellant [fired] the gun at [the victim] to further the robbery, and they were thus authorized to convict appellant of the offense as charged. [Cit.]” Id. at 283.

Aggravated assault by automobile requires a general intent to injure because it includes simple assault.

Cline v. State · filed 1991-04-09(a)(2)

As aggravated assault includes the elements of a simple assault, it is essential that an aggravated assault by automobile, under OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2), be committed with a general intent to injure.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon does not require intent to injure; the victim’s reasonable apprehension of harm from the weapon establishes the offense.

Collins v. State · filed 1991-05-08(a)(2)

Intent to injure is not an element of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Section 16-5-21 does not require the prosecution to prove that the victim knew the defendant was shooting at him.

Brown v. State · filed 1991-07-16

It was not incumbent upon the prosecution to prove that the victim was aware the defendant was shooting at him.

Section 16-5-21 does not require the deadly weapon to injure the victim for an aggravated assault conviction.

Gilbert v. State · filed 1993-06-25

Contrary to defendant’s contentions otherwise, there is no requirement that the victim actually be injured by the deadly weapon before a conviction for aggravated assault is authorized.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon includes simple assault as an element, so the jury may be instructed on that element.

McKibben v. State · filed 1994-03-10(a)(2)

McKibben was charged with committing aggravated assault “with a knife, a deadly weapon.” OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2). The trial court did not err in defining the essential element of simple assault as an element of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) permits an aggravated assault conviction for a child in the line of fire when shooting at the person carrying her constitutes an attempt to injure both.

Jordan v. State · filed 1994-09-09(a)(2)

Firing a weapon at both of them constituted an. undifferentiated attempt to injure both, even if defendant’s intent was only to injure Wright. ... Within these parameters, then, and after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury’s determination of guilt, we conclude that any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime (OCGA §§ 16-5-20 (a) (1) and 16-5-21 (a) (2)) beyond a reasonable doubt.

Intentionally brandishing a knife at a victim can constitute aggravated assault even when the actor is trying to flee.

Marion v. State · filed 1997-01-30(a)(2)

There is no testimony that would support a finding that Marion’s brandishing of the knife in the presence of the named victims was only criminally negligent rather than intentional. That he committed aggravated assault as he tried to flee does not change the character of his actions with the knife.

Biting an officer does not by itself constitute aggravated assault under § 16-5-21.

Williams v. State · filed 1997-08-27

Moreover, biting does not per se constitute an aggravated assault; it can, for example, constitute simple battery under certain conditions.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon can rest on an attempt to commit a violent injury even when the victim’s apprehension of injury is disputed.

Harris v. State · filed 1998-07-30(a)(2)

Among other ways, an aggravated assault occurs when a person assaults another with “a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury.” OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2). ... Even if we were to accept Harris’ argument that Monica’s attempt to protect Carla showed that she was not apprehensive about receiving a violent injury, the evidence clearly shows that Harris assaulted Monica by his attempt to commit a violent injury to her.

Aggravated assault requires an assault aggravated by a deadly weapon or by an object that, when used offensively, is likely to cause or does cause serious bodily injury.

Gamble v. State · filed 1998-12-01(a)(2)

The offense of aggravated assault consists of two essential elements: (1) an assault and (2) aggravation by use of “a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury.” OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2).

For aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, the State must prove an intended act that is likely to cause deadly violence or places another in reasonable apprehension of immediate violent injury.

Osborne v. State · filed 1997-10-08(a)(2)

Based on Jordan and Matthews, we conclude that to prove intent the State must show the defendant intended an act, which is productive of violence likely to result in the destruction of life, or which places another in a reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon based on an attempted violent injury requires criminal intent; criminal negligence cannot substitute for it.

Dunagan v. State · filed 1998-07-16(a)(2)

Because an aggravated assault with a deadly weapon based on OCGA § 16-5-20(a)(1) cannot be committed by criminal negligence, we agree with Dunagan that the trial court's instructions to the jury were error.

A victim need not be aware that the defendant possesses a firearm for an aggravated assault conviction based on its possession.

Busch v. State · filed 1998-10-16

The State had to prove that defendant was in possession of a firearm during the assaults of Jay Baker and Kim Veal, not that these victims were aware of defendant’s possession of a firearm. This is so because awareness is not an essential element of the challenged offenses, i.e., aggravated assault, armed robbery, criminal attempt to commit armed robbery and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) does not require proof of actual bodily injury to sustain an aggravated assault conviction.

Reynolds v. State · filed 1998-10-26(a)(2)

As to the aggravated assault conviction, Reynolds’ argument ignores the fact that evidence of an actual bodily injury is not required to sustain a conviction under OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2).

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) requires an assault aggravated by use of a deadly weapon or an object that, when used offensively, is likely to cause or does cause serious bodily injury.

Elrod v. State · filed 1999-05-13(a)(2)

The offense of aggravated assault consists of two essential elements: (1) an assault and (2) aggravation by use of “a deadly weapon or . . . any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury.” OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2).

Aggravated assault requires an assault and aggravation involving a deadly weapon, object, or device likely to cause or actually causing serious bodily injury.

Allen v. State · filed 2000-04-28(a)

Aggravated assault has two essential elements: an assault and aggravation, consisting of a deadly weapon, object, or device that, when used against another, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) requires an assault aggravated by use of a deadly weapon, object, device, or instrument likely to or actually causing serious bodily injury when used offensively.

Free v. State · filed 2000-09-13(a)(2)

The two essential elements of aggravated assault are (1) an assault and (2) aggravation by the use of a deadly weapon, object, device, or instrument “which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury.”

Section 16-5-21(a) covers an assault committed with intent to murder, rape, or rob, or with a deadly weapon or another instrument likely to cause serious bodily injury.

Robinson v. State · filed 2000-10-31(a)

To be convicted of aggravated assault, the evidence must show that the defendant assaulted: “(1) With intent to murder, to rape, or to rob; [or] (2) [w]ith a deadly weapon or with any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury.” OCGA § 16-5-21 (a).

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon does not require the victim to be injured.

Vick v. State · filed 1999-04-27(a)(2)

There is no requirement that a victim be actually injured.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon does not require actual injury.

Salahuddin v. State · filed 1999-11-17(a)(2)

Likewise, in this case, actual injury is not an essential element of aggravated assault under Georgia law.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers intentionally firing a weapon to scare victims, even without an intent to hit them.

Huguley v. State · filed 2000-02-22(a)(2)

The evidence, including Huguley’s own admissions, clearly established that Huguley repeatedly fired his weapon with the intention of scaring the victims, even if he did not intend to hit them. As such, the evidence established aggravated assault under OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2), and there was no error in the failure to give an instruction on reckless conduct.

Aggravated assault by stabbing with a deadly weapon does not require proof that the victim apprehended the injury.

Brinson v. State · filed 2000-05-01

It is true that central to the offense of aggravated .assault is that an assault as defined in OCGA § 16-5-20 be committed on the victim. OCGA § 16-5-21. ... Brinson was charged with the underlying felony of aggravated assault by stabbing Glenn with a knife, a deadly weapon. Thus, it was unnecessary for the State to show Glenn’s apprehension of the violent injuries inflicted on him.

Firing a gun toward people at close range can support aggravated assault convictions when their reactions show reasonable apprehension of immediate violent injury.

Strange v. State · filed 2000-05-31(a)(2)

The facts here clearly show that Bonner and Malcom reacted defensively and aggressively upon realizing defendant had taken them under fire from close range. This was sufficient circumstantial evidence to show that they had been placed in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving violent injury.

Section 16-5-21 requires proof of simple assault with an aggravating circumstance.

Powles v. State · filed 2001-02-08

To prove aggravated assault, the State must show simple assault with certain aggravating circumstances.

Section 16-5-21(a) covers an assault committed with intent to rob or with a deadly weapon.

Davis v. State · filed 2001-05-09(a)

OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) provides: “A person commits the offense of aggravated assault when he or she assaults . . . [w]ith intent to . . . rob; ... [or w]ith a deadly weapon.” There is ample evidence that Robinson threatened Keels with the gun and had the intention to rob the store. Accordingly, the evidence supports Davis’ conviction as a party to the crime of aggravated assault.

A victim’s reasonable apprehension of immediate violent injury from a weapon supports aggravated assault even if the victim says they were not afraid.

Carter v. State · filed 2001-02-19(a)(2)

So, if the victim is in reasonable apprehension of an immediate violent injury from a weapon, an aggravated assault has occurred. ... Because reasonable apprehension of injury is not the same as simple fear, the testimony that the victim was not afraid of the defendant does not preclude conviction.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers an assault with an object that could cause serious bodily injury when used offensively; physical contact is not required.

Kelley v. State · filed 2001-03-06(a)(2)

The State showed that Kelley assaulted the victim with an object, here, a beer mug, which when used offensively against a person could result in serious bodily injury. This constituted evidence of aggravated assault as defined by OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2). Physical contact is not a required element of aggravated assault.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) requires general intent to injure, rather than specific criminal intent, for aggravated assault with a deadly or offensive weapon.

Durrance v. State · filed 2001-04-24(a)(2)

Aggravated assault committed by means of a deadly or offensive weapon, unlike aggravated assault committed with the intent to murder, rape, or rob, does not require a specific criminal intent.

Aggravated assault based on an attempted injury requires intent to injure; reckless or negligent conduct alone is insufficient.

Montford v. State · filed 2002-03-27

To sustain a charge of aggravated assault under subsection (a) (1), the attempted or completed injury to the victim must be the intended consequence of the defendant’s act.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) does not require proof of actual serious bodily injury to sustain an aggravated assault conviction.

Allsup v. State · filed 2001-06-08(a)(2)

Moreover, Allsup’s argument ignores the fact that evidence of an actual serious bodily injury is not required to sustain a conviction under OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2).

Motive is not an element of aggravated assault.

Scott v. State · filed 2001-08-24

The state was not required to establish motive, since motive is not an element of the offenses of aggravated assault or aggravated battery.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) requires an assault; remaining still while holding a knife and failing to obey commands does not establish the necessary act.

In Re CS · filed 2001-08-28(a)(2)

The elements of aggravated assault relevant to this case are (1) assault (2) "[w]ith a deadly weapon or with any object... which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to ... result in serious bodily injury." OCGA § 16-5-21(a)(2). ... Accordingly, we find that there is no evidence of an act, a necessary element of both the attempt and the reasonable apprehension alternatives of simple assault, and we therefore find insufficient evidence supports the aggravated assault portion of C. S.' adjudication of delinquency.

Aggravated assault requires an act constituting simple assault; holding a knife without a threatening act does not satisfy that element.

In the Interest of C. S. · filed 2001-08-28(a)(2)

Accordingly, we find that there is no evidence of an act, a necessary element of both the attempt and the reasonable apprehension alternatives of simple assault, and we therefore find insufficient evidence supports the aggravated assault portion of C. S.’ adjudication of delinquency.

Threats with a knife can establish aggravated assault when they place the victims in fear of immediately receiving bodily harm.

In Re AA · filed 2002-02-21

The victims' testimony, although in conflict with that of A.A., was sufficient to authorize the finding that through A.A.'s threats and use of the knife, the victims were placed in fear of immediately receiving bodily harm as required by OCGA § 16-5-21.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon does not require intent to kill.

Chapman v. State · filed 2002-06-10(a)(2)

Intent to kill is not an element of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon requires only a general intent to injure.

Freeman v. State · filed 2002-08-30(a)(2)

1. OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2) provides that aggravated assault is committed when a person assaults “[w]ith a deadly weapon or with any . . . instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does [cause] serious bodily injury.” As Freeman correctly notes, the crime requires proof of only a general intent to injure.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon based on reasonable apprehension requires intent to commit the acts causing that apprehension, but does not require intent to injure.

Gray v. State · filed 2002-09-16(a)(2)

Instead, the focus is on the victim’s state of mind and the only intent that must be shown is the criminal intent to commit the acts that caused the victim to be reasonably apprehensive of receiving a violent injury.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon does not require intent to injure when the victim reasonably apprehends harm from a firearm.

Tanner v. State · filed 2003-01-09(a)(2)

Tanner contends the verdict cannot be sustained because there was no evidence that he intended to commit a violent injury. This argument is meritless. “Intent to injure is not an element of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. . . . It is the reasonable apprehension of harm by the victim of an assault by a firearm that establishes the crime of aggravated assault, not the assailant’s intent to injure.”

Reasonable apprehension of injury for aggravated assault may be proved through circumstantial evidence even when the victim later testifies that she was not afraid.

Gordian v. State · filed 2003-04-03(a)(2)

OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2) provides that a person commits an aggravated assault when he assaults with a deadly weapon. ... Despite the ex-wife’s later testimony that she was not fearful during the incident, this police testimony was sufficient for the jury to conclude that the ex-wife had a reasonable apprehension of receiving a violent injury.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon requires reasonable apprehension of immediate violent injury; a victim’s testimony that she was not afraid does not preclude conviction.

Lunsford v. State · filed 2003-04-10(a)(2)

Thus, “if the victim is in reasonable apprehension of an immediate violent injury from a weapon, an aggravated assault has occurred. Because reasonable apprehension of injury is not the same as simple fear, the testimony that the victim was not afraid of the defendant does not preclude conviction.”

For an aggravated assault charge under subsection (a)(2) based on a shooting, the State must prove the defendant used the gun.

Baker v. State · filed 2003-10-01(a)(2)

Based upon the incident as described in the recorder’s court, the State must rely on Baker’s use of the gun to show aggravated assault and reckless conduct, a fact which was not required to show disorderly conduct. See OCGA §§ 16-5-21 (a) (2); 16-5-60 (b).

Section 16-5-21 covers an assault committed with intent to rob or with a deadly weapon or other object likely to cause serious bodily injury when used offensively.

Brown v. State · filed 2004-06-02(a)(1), (2)

An aggravated assault occurs when a person assaults with the intent to rob or with a deadly weapon or any object which, when used offensively, is likely to result in serious bodily injury.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) does not require a jury instruction defining “serious bodily injury” as injury likely to cause “death or great bodily harm.”

Stewart v. State · filed 2003-06-11(a)(2)

Stewart also argues error in the trial court’s refusal to give his requested charge stating that the term “serious bodily injury” as used in the aggravated assault statute means such injury as is likely to cause “death or great bodily harm.” ... Because the requested charge was not a complete and correct statement of the law, the trial court committed no error in refusing to give the charge.

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon requires an intentional act that places another person in reasonable apprehension of injury; intent to injure is unnecessary.

Easley v. State · filed 2004-04-09(a)(2)

“ ‘Intent to injure is not an element of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.... It is the reasonable apprehension of harm by the victim of an assault by a firearm that establishes the crime of aggravated assault, not the assailant’s intent to injure.’ ”

Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon does not require the victim to sustain an actual injury.

Turbeville v. State · filed 2004-06-24(a)(2)

There is no requirement that the victim sustain an actual injury, and the crime is complete without proof thereof.

Section 16-5-21 does not require the victim to perceive a deadly or severe injury; reasonable apprehension of a violent injury from a weapon capable of causing death is enough.

Lemming v. State · filed 2005-03-11

In this regard, the statute cited in the indictment, OCGA § 16-5-21, requires that an aggravated assault be made with a deadly weapon, i.e., a weapon capable of producing death, which is the most severe possible injury. But an assault per OCGA § 16-5-20(a)(2) requires only that the victim be in reasonable apprehension (i.e., perception) of receiving a "violent injury." Thus, a conviction for aggravated assault does not require that the victim perceive the onset of a deadly or severe injury, but merely a "violent injury" from a weapon which is capable of causing death.

Aggravated assault occurs when use of a deadly weapon places the victim in reasonable apprehension of immediate violent injury.

In Re Mf · filed 2005-11-16(a)(2)

When the use of a deadly weapon places the victim in reasonable apprehension of immediate violent injury, the felony offense of aggravated assault has occurred.

A factfinder may infer the intent to injure required for aggravated assault from driving toward a person who must move to avoid being struck, together with the driver's hostility and flight.

Young v. State · filed 2005-05-03(a)(2)

Here, the evidence showed that Young was not simply acting in a wanton or reckless manner. The victim testified that if he had not moved out of the way, he would have been struck. Given this fact, along with Young’s hostility and flight during the entire encounter with the victim, a rational trier of fact was authorized to conclude that Young intended to harm the victim. The evidence authorized the verdict.

Section 16-5-21 covers an assault with an object that, when used offensively, is likely to cause serious bodily injury.

Hernandez v. State · filed 2005-07-13(a)(2)

The evidence was also sufficient to show that Hernandez assaulted Ixmay with an object which when used offensively was likely to result in serious bodily injury.

An aggravated assault indictment alleging use of an object likely to result in serious bodily injury need not allege or prove use of a deadly weapon.

Anthony v. State · filed 2005-08-30(a)(2)

Since the indictment charged that Boatwright’s fists were likely to result in serious bodily injury, no reference to, or evidence of, a deadly weapon was required at trial.

Section 16-5-21(a)(2) covers an assault with an object that, when used offensively, is likely to cause or actually causes serious bodily injury.

Moyer v. State · filed 2005-09-02(a)(2)

An aggravated assault occurs when a person assaults another with “any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury.” OCGA § 16-5-21 (a) (2). We find the evidence sufficient to support the four counts.

A victim’s reasonable apprehension of injury in an aggravated assault can be proved by circumstantial evidence without the victim’s testimony.

Anthony v. State · filed 2005-10-25(a)(2)

Furthermore, Anthony’s contention that Lawrence’s reasonable apprehension of injury cannot be established without Lawrence’s testimony is incorrect, as such apprehension can be proved by circumstantial or indirect evidence as well as by direct or positive evidence.

Aggravated assault occurs when use of a deadly weapon places the victim in reasonable apprehension of immediate violent injury.

In the Interest of M. F. · filed 2005-11-16(a)(2)

When the use of a deadly weapon places the victim in reasonable apprehension of immediate violent injury, the felony offense of aggravated assault has occurred.