Burns v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Burns v. State

39 S.E.2d 402, 201 Ga. 200, 1946 Ga. LEXIS 444

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 4, 1946

Docket15568.

StatusPublished

This text of 39 S.E.2d 402 (Burns v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burns v. State, 39 S.E.2d 402, 201 Ga. 200, 1946 Ga. LEXIS 444 (Ga. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

Duckworth, Justice.

I. The evidence for the State proved the crime of murder as alleged in the indictment, and the defendant’s statement upon the trial admitted the commission of the crime as alleged, and stated that the motive was robbery. The general grounds of the motion for new trial are without merit.

*201 No. 15568. September 4, 1946. W. G. Martin and E. W. Feeney, for plaintiff in error. Eugene Goolc, Attorney-General, E. L. Forrester, Solicitor-General, and Boscoe Thompson, Assistant Attorney-General, contra.

2. The two special grounds of the motion complain that the court should have instructed the jury that, in case they found both of the defendants guilty, the two defendants being tried jointly, they could recommend mercy for one of them and not the other; and that the charge as given instructed the jury that they could not recommend mercy for one defendant and not the other. The court fully instructed the jury as to their duty to make a separate verdict for'each defendant, and that in either verdict they rendered, “whether a verdict of guilty, of both or either of these defendants,” they were authorized in their discretion and without reason to add to that verdict a recommendation of mercy. There is no merit in either of the special grounds.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Duckworth, Justice.

I. The evidence for the State proved the crime of murder as alleged in the indictment, and the defendant’s statement upon the trial admitted the commission of the crime as alleged, and stated that the motive was robbery. The general grounds of the motion for new trial are without merit.

*201 No. 15568. September 4, 1946. W. G. Martin and E. W. Feeney, for plaintiff in error. Eugene Goolc, Attorney-General, E. L. Forrester, Solicitor-General, and Boscoe Thompson, Assistant Attorney-General, contra.

2. The two special grounds of the motion complain that the court should have instructed the jury that, in case they found both of the defendants guilty, the two defendants being tried jointly, they could recommend mercy for one of them and not the other; and that the charge as given instructed the jury that they could not recommend mercy for one defendant and not the other. The court fully instructed the jury as to their duty to make a separate verdict for'each defendant, and that in either verdict they rendered, “whether a verdict of guilty, of both or either of these defendants,” they were authorized in their discretion and without reason to add to that verdict a recommendation of mercy. There is no merit in either of the special grounds.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 S.E.2d 402, 201 Ga. 200, 1946 Ga. LEXIS 444, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burns-v-state-ga-1946.