Brazell v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Brazell v. State

231 S.E.2d 105, 140 Ga. App. 340, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 1460

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 22, 1976

Docket52965

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 231 S.E.2d 105 (Brazell 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

Brazell v. State, 231 S.E.2d 105, 140 Ga. App. 340, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 1460 (Ga. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Deen, Presiding Judge.

This appeal from a conviction for cattle theft is on the sole ground that the court allowed a purported confession to be considered by the jury without first making an affirmative ruling on its voluntariness, and without setting forth specific findings of fact and conclusions of law. "The trial judge need not make formal findings of fact or write an opinion, but it must clearly appear from the record that he made a primary finding of voluntariness before the confession was introduced. Hilliard v. State, 128 Ga. App. 157, 158 (195 SE2d 772); Sims v. Georgia, 385 U. S. 538 (87 SC 639, 17 LE2d 593). The court heard evidence in the absence of the jury on the circumstances and contents of the defendant’s incriminatory statement, and ruled: "The court finds that it was freely and voluntarily made, and the court’s going to admit it as a statement.” No error appears.

Judgment affirmed.

Webb and Smith, JJ., concur. *341 John W. Underwood, District Attorney, Dupont K. Cheney, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

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

Deen, Presiding Judge.

This appeal from a conviction for cattle theft is on the sole ground that the court allowed a purported confession to be considered by the jury without first making an affirmative ruling on its voluntariness, and without setting forth specific findings of fact and conclusions of law. "The trial judge need not make formal findings of fact or write an opinion, but it must clearly appear from the record that he made a primary finding of voluntariness before the confession was introduced. Hilliard v. State, 128 Ga. App. 157, 158 (195 SE2d 772); Sims v. Georgia, 385 U. S. 538 (87 SC 639, 17 LE2d 593). The court heard evidence in the absence of the jury on the circumstances and contents of the defendant’s incriminatory statement, and ruled: "The court finds that it was freely and voluntarily made, and the court’s going to admit it as a statement.” No error appears.

Judgment affirmed.

Webb and Smith, JJ., concur. *341 John W. Underwood, District Attorney, Dupont K. Cheney, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

231 S.E.2d 105, 140 Ga. App. 340, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 1460, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brazell-v-state-gactapp-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack