Cannington v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Cannington v. State

269 S.E.2d 62, 154 Ga. App. 557, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2282

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 8, 1980

Docket59727

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 269 S.E.2d 62 (Cannington 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

Cannington v. State, 269 S.E.2d 62, 154 Ga. App. 557, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2282 (Ga. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Quillian, Presiding Judge.

This is an appeal by Elzie Cannington from a denial of his motion to the trial court for the return of his property which had been seized by the state for use as evidence in his criminal trial. Cannington had been indicted for the offense of murder of Patricia Cannington by shooting her with a pistol. He entered a plea of guilty to the lesser offense of voluntary manslaughter on June 26, 1979, and was sentenced to serve 18 years imprisonment. He did not appeal the conviction.

On December 3,1979, counsel for defendant filed a "Motion for Return of Defendant’s Property” seeking return of "certain personal photographs,” a pistol — presumably used in shooting the deceased, and "a door with curtain attached.” The motion was denied. Cannington brings this appeal. Held:

1. The photographs were destroyed by order of the court. That issue is now moot insofar as the motion seeks return of the property.

2. A weapon used in the commission of a crime is declared to be contraband by Code Ann. § 27-3101 (Ga. L. 1967, p. 749; 1977, pp. 1131, 1132). The sheriff is authorized to sell or destroy the weapon when it is no longer needed for evidentiary purposes. Code Ann. § 27-3102 (Ga. L. 1967, p. 749; 1976, p. 167). The court did not err in refusing to return the pistol.

3. The remaining "door” presumably has evidentiary value to the state. Items having evidentiary value may be retained by the state for a reasonable length of time following the trial. We note various avenues of appeal used by criminal defendants following conviction, i.e. state and federal habeas corpus, extraordinary *558 motions for new trial, etc. Determination of a reasonable length of time is for the trial court. Absent abuse of discretion, an appellate court will not reverse. We find no abuse of discretion in the instant case.

Submitted April 9, 1980 Decided May 8, 1980. M. Dale English, for appellant. Lamar Cole, District Attorney, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Shulman and Carley, JJ., concur.

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

Quillian, Presiding Judge.

This is an appeal by Elzie Cannington from a denial of his motion to the trial court for the return of his property which had been seized by the state for use as evidence in his criminal trial. Cannington had been indicted for the offense of murder of Patricia Cannington by shooting her with a pistol. He entered a plea of guilty to the lesser offense of voluntary manslaughter on June 26, 1979, and was sentenced to serve 18 years imprisonment. He did not appeal the conviction.

On December 3,1979, counsel for defendant filed a "Motion for Return of Defendant’s Property” seeking return of "certain personal photographs,” a pistol — presumably used in shooting the deceased, and "a door with curtain attached.” The motion was denied. Cannington brings this appeal. Held:

1. The photographs were destroyed by order of the court. That issue is now moot insofar as the motion seeks return of the property.

2. A weapon used in the commission of a crime is declared to be contraband by Code Ann. § 27-3101 (Ga. L. 1967, p. 749; 1977, pp. 1131, 1132). The sheriff is authorized to sell or destroy the weapon when it is no longer needed for evidentiary purposes. Code Ann. § 27-3102 (Ga. L. 1967, p. 749; 1976, p. 167). The court did not err in refusing to return the pistol.

3. The remaining "door” presumably has evidentiary value to the state. Items having evidentiary value may be retained by the state for a reasonable length of time following the trial. We note various avenues of appeal used by criminal defendants following conviction, i.e. state and federal habeas corpus, extraordinary *558 motions for new trial, etc. Determination of a reasonable length of time is for the trial court. Absent abuse of discretion, an appellate court will not reverse. We find no abuse of discretion in the instant case.

Submitted April 9, 1980 Decided May 8, 1980. M. Dale English, for appellant. Lamar Cole, District Attorney, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Shulman and Carley, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 S.E.2d 62, 154 Ga. App. 557, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2282, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cannington-v-state-gactapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack