Home/Supreme Court of Georgia/Anderson v. State

Anderson v. State

312 S.E.2d 113, 252 Ga. 103
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 9, 1984
Docket39874
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 312 S.E.2d 113 (Anderson v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Anderson v. State, 312 S.E.2d 113, 252 Ga. 103 (Ga. 1984).

Opinion

Gregory, Justice.

We granted certiorari in this case to review the holding in Division 1 of the Court of Appeals’ opinion Anderson v. State, 165 Ga. App. 885 (303 SE2d 57) (1983).

The defendant was on trial for the offense of selling cocaine. The State called a GBI agent as a witness. When asked how he knew the defendant, the witness responded, “First of all, I was given a list and Robert Anderson was on that list as being one of the suspected drug dealers. ...” There was an objection on the ground the testimony placed defendant’s character in evidence without defendant having first done so himself. OCGA § 24-2-2 (Code Ann. § 38-202). The objection was overruled. There was no objection on the ground the testimony was hearsay.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the action of the trial court on the *104 basis of OCGA § 24-3-2 1 (Code Ann. § 38-302) which permits certain evidence which would otherwise be hearsay so long as it is admitted for the limited purpose of explaining conduct or ascertaining motives. But see, Momon v. State, 249 Ga. 865 (294 SE2d 482) (1982). This fails, however, to meet the objection that the testimony placed in evidence defendant’s character. That objection was well taken, corrective action was omitted by the trial court, OCGA § 24-3-2 (Code Ann. § 38-302) is not an answer, and we must reverse the Court of Appeals.

Decided February 9, 1984. Rick F. Ellis, for appellant. Arthur W. Leach, for appellee.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur, except Marshall, P. J., who concurs in the judgment only.
1

“When, in a legal investigation, information, conversations, and letters and replies, and similar evidence are facts to explain conduct and ascertain motives, they shall be admitted in evidence not as hearsay but as original evidence.”

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Gaskin v. the State
780 S.E.2d 426 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2015)
Harris v. State
641 S.E.2d 619 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2007)
Pitts v. State
580 S.E.2d 618 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2003)
Tate v. State
564 S.E.2d 495 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2002)
Pruitt v. State
559 S.E.2d 470 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2002)
Binns v. State
516 S.E.2d 583 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1999)
Williams v. State
427 S.E.2d 59 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1993)
Dawson v. State
422 S.E.2d 280 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
Baptiste v. State
379 S.E.2d 165 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
Edwards v. State
374 S.E.2d 97 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1988)
Byrd v. State
335 S.E.2d 656 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1985)
Pyburn v. State
332 S.E.2d 899 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1985)
Teague v. State
314 S.E.2d 910 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1984)
Anderson v. State
318 S.E.2d 839 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1984)
Ivester v. State
313 S.E.2d 674 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
312 S.E.2d 113, 252 Ga. 103, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-state-ga-1984.