Bonner v. State

67 Ga. 510
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided May 15, 1881·Published·Cited by 24 cases

Opinion

JACKSON, Chief Justice.

Without scanning this entire record,' we are of the opinion that a new trial must be granted, on the ground that the court erred in recalling the jury and recharging them at their request, in the absence of .the. defendant, who was at the time in custody and confinement, though his counsel were present, but silent.

The presence of the prisoner is necessary to Fis.legal trial from the beginning to the end of that trial before the jury. 12 Ga., 25. And such was the rule and practice at common law. Wharton’s Crim. Plead, and Prac., 540 a, 545, 546, 549, 550.

Counsel for, the state conceded that the law required it, but insisted 'that the evidence before the circuit judge, which induced him to certify that this ground of the motion for a. new trial was true in fact — that is, that he did charge in the absence of the prisoner, who was in confinement at the time, should be also before this court; and that evidence; not being-in the record, the point could not be heard here. We cannot think so. If. the judge certifies any ground taken in the motion for. a new trial to be true in fact, this court receives that certificate as true, cer[512] tain beyond cavil, conclusive; and it will not enquire on what proof he was satisfied of its truth. It is quite certain that the court below will take care of itself, and only certify any facts which make a charge of error upon indubitable assurance.

It matters not to this court whether what he certifies was made certain to him by affidavits, or by admission of the parties, or by his own observation. It is enough that his mind is satisfied of the truth of the ground taken, and that he so certifies in the record.

Judgment reversed.

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

Bonner v. State, 67 Ga. 510 (Ga. 1881).

67 Ga. 510 (Bonner v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Holsey v. State
524 S.E.2d 473 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1999)
Goodroe v. State
480 S.E.2d 378 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1997)
Fictum v. State
373 S.E.2d 54 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1988)
Gilreath v. State
279 S.E.2d 650 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1981)
Finney v. State
258 S.E.2d 670 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1979)
Thacker v. State
173 S.E.2d 186 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1970)
Seay v. State
140 S.E.2d 283 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1965)
People v. Tilley
104 N.E.2d 499 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1952)
Miles v. State
53 N.E.2d 779 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1944)
The People v. McGrane
168 N.E. 321 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1929)
Hughes v. State
127 S.E. 109 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1925)
Williams v. State
104 S.E. 776 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1920)
Mills v. State
97 S.E. 408 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1918)
McCurry v. City of Rome
86 S.E. 399 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1915)
Frank v. State
83 S.E. 645 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1914)
Lyons v. State
66 S.E. 149 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1909)
Percer v. State
118 Tenn. 765 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1907)
Hopson v. State
42 S.E. 412 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1902)
Tiller v. State
23 S.E. 825 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1895)
Wilson v. State
13 S.E. 566 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1891)