Defendant was charged with violating the Georgia Controlled Substances Act by manufacturing marijuana and also misdemeanor possession of marijuana (less than one ounce). He was tried before a jury and found guilty only of manufacturing marijuana. Defendant appeals from the judgment of conviction and sentence entered on the jury's verdict. Held:
In his sole enumeration of error, defendant contends the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial on the special ground that the trial court "express[ed] an opinion in response to a juror's question after the court recharged the jury," in violation of OCGA 17-8-57
The transcript shows that, in response to the jury's request for additional instructions, the trial court recharged the jury on the definition of manufacturing marijuana. The following then transpired:
"[JUROR]: I guess the question that came up was . . . if you came to the conclusion that they were aware of it and did nothing about it, is that still considered manufacturing? [THE COURT]: Well, it's your -- the answer to me, that would be yes. I don't know what, if you let people use your property without doing something about it, to grow marijuana or manufacture, that would be -- you have the power to control that; if you don't, then it becomes, you become a party [THE JUROR]: That was the question that came up." The trial court then directly inquired of counsel as to "[a]ny objections to the recharge and to anything I said to the jury during that recharge?" Defense counsel replied, "No objection, your honor."