Bray v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Bray v. State

303 S.E.2d 752, 166 Ga. App. 187, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2095

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 5, 1983

Docket65329

StatusPublished

This text of 303 S.E.2d 752 (Bray v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bray v. State, 303 S.E.2d 752, 166 Ga. App. 187, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2095 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

Sognier, Judge.

Appellant was tried for the offense of wilful abandonment of an illegitimate child. The jury found that appellant was the father of the child but was not guilty of abandonment of the child. Appellant made a motion to correct verdict and/or judgment of the court on the ground that the jury verdict was inconsistent. The motion was denied, and appellant contends the trial court erred by denying his motion.

Appellant argues that it was inconsistent to find that appellant was the father of the child in question, but was not guilty of the criminal charge of wilfully abandoning the child. We do not agree.

While we do not have a transcript of the trial itself, the hearing on the motion indicates that prior to, and during, his trial appellant denied being the father of the minor, illegitimate child. Since appellant did not believe he was the father of the child, but blood tests presented at trial proved otherwise, we find nothing inconsistent with a verdict finding that appellant was the father, but had not wilfully abandoned the child. Further, since wilful abandonment of a dependent child is a criminal offense (OCGA § 19-10-1 (Code Ann. § 74-9902)) and appellant was acquitted, there is nothing for us to review. White v. State, 160 Ga. App. 857 (288 SE2d 574) (1982).

Appeal dismissed.

Quillian, P. J., and Pope, J., concur.

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

Sognier, Judge.

Appellant was tried for the offense of wilful abandonment of an illegitimate child. The jury found that appellant was the father of the child but was not guilty of abandonment of the child. Appellant made a motion to correct verdict and/or judgment of the court on the ground that the jury verdict was inconsistent. The motion was denied, and appellant contends the trial court erred by denying his motion.

Appellant argues that it was inconsistent to find that appellant was the father of the child in question, but was not guilty of the criminal charge of wilfully abandoning the child. We do not agree.

While we do not have a transcript of the trial itself, the hearing on the motion indicates that prior to, and during, his trial appellant denied being the father of the minor, illegitimate child. Since appellant did not believe he was the father of the child, but blood tests presented at trial proved otherwise, we find nothing inconsistent with a verdict finding that appellant was the father, but had not wilfully abandoned the child. Further, since wilful abandonment of a dependent child is a criminal offense (OCGA § 19-10-1 (Code Ann. § 74-9902)) and appellant was acquitted, there is nothing for us to review. White v. State, 160 Ga. App. 857 (288 SE2d 574) (1982).

Appeal dismissed.

Quillian, P. J., and Pope, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 S.E.2d 752, 166 Ga. App. 187, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2095, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bray-v-state-gactapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack