Bridges v. State
This text of 70 S.E. 968 (Bridges 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.
Opinion
1. Statements by the accused which may be considered as incriminatory, but not amounting to a confession of guilt, will not require a charge to the jury on the law of confessions.
2. The receiver of stolen goods is not an accomplice with the principal thief (Lowery v. State, 72 Ga. 649) ; and therefore, although there were some circumstances which might tend to show that a witness against the principal thief was himself the receiver of some portion of the good's stolen, the judge was not required to charge on the subject of the testimony of an accomplice.
3. Recently after the perpetration of a burglary the accused was found [236]*236in tlie possession of and exercising ownership over a part of the property-stolen from the storehouse at the time the burglary was committed. Whether the explanation which he gave of his possession and acts of ownership over the property was consistent with his innocence and satisfactory was a matter exclusively for the jury.- They did not accept the explanation, and were therefore authorized to infer, from his possession recently after the burglary was committed, that he was guilty.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
70 S.E. 968, 9 Ga. App. 235, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 491, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bridges-v-state-gactapp-1911.