Brooks v. State

78 S.E. 143, 12 Ga. App. 693, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 712
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMay 6, 1913
Docket4834
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 78 S.E. 143 (Brooks 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
Brooks v. State, 78 S.E. 143, 12 Ga. App. 693, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 712 (Ga. Ct. App. 1913).

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

1. The rule of law that the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice is not legally sufficient to convict does not apply to misdemeanor cases. Nevertheless the fact that the principal witness against the accused in a misdemeanor case is an accomplice is a fact that the jury can properly take into consideration in weighing the credibility of his evidence. In the present case, however, the positive and direct [694]*694testimony of the accomplice is abundantly corroborated by many strong circumstances connecting the accused with the commission of the offense, which would have been sufficient of themselves to authorize a conviction, even without the evidence of the accomplice.

Decided May 6, 1913. Accusation of keeping lewd house; from city court of Columbus—Judge Tigner. February 22, 1913. Wynn & Wohlwender, T. T. Miller, for plaintiff in error. T. H. Fori, solicitor, contra.

2. The instructions of the court to the jury, relating to the impeachment of a witness by evidence of his general bad character, while, -strictly speaking, not pertinent to any of the evidence on the subject of bad character, in the present case could not have been harmful'to the accused, since they could have applied only to the evidence of the accomplice, who was a material witness for the State.

3. The evidence establishing the guilt of the accused was both direct and circumstantial, and there was no error in the failure of the trial judge to charge as to the effect and weight of circumstantial evidence.

4. No error of law appears; and the evidence, both direct and circumstantial, strongly and clearly shows that the verdict of guilty was proper. ' | Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Martin v. State
86 S.E. 945 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
78 S.E. 143, 12 Ga. App. 693, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 712, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brooks-v-state-gactapp-1913.