Chambley v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Chambley v. State

313 S.E.2d 718, 169 Ga. App. 424, 1984 Ga. App. LEXIS 1574

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 4, 1984

Docket66981

StatusPublished

This text of 313 S.E.2d 718 (Chambley 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

Chambley v. State, 313 S.E.2d 718, 169 Ga. App. 424, 1984 Ga. App. LEXIS 1574 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Banke, Judge.

The defendant was charged in a 2-count indictment with burglarizing two separate residences on the same date. He was acquitted on the first count but found guilty on the second. On appeal, he contends that the evidence presented by the state on Count 2 was insufficient to overcome his evidence of alibi and that his conviction on that count cannot be reconciled with his acquittal on Count 1. Held:

1. It was for the jury to reconcile the defendant’s alibi evidence with the testimony of the state’s witness, who positively identified him as the person who broke into her home on the date in question. See generally McCarty v. State, 161 Ga. App. 444, 446 (288 SE2d 249) (1982); Laws v. State, 153 Ga. App. 166 (1) (264 SE2d 700) (1980). The evidence as a whole was sufficient to enable a rational trier of fact to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. See generally Crawford v. State, 245 Ga. 89 (1) (263 SE2d 131) (1980).

2. The defendant’s complaint that he “cannot in his thinking reconcile the logic in acquittal of one act and conviction as to another similar act following as to time and place” establishes no ground for reversal. The two charges were completely distinct, as was the evidence in support of them.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Carley, J., concur.

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

Banke, Judge.

The defendant was charged in a 2-count indictment with burglarizing two separate residences on the same date. He was acquitted on the first count but found guilty on the second. On appeal, he contends that the evidence presented by the state on Count 2 was insufficient to overcome his evidence of alibi and that his conviction on that count cannot be reconciled with his acquittal on Count 1. Held:

1. It was for the jury to reconcile the defendant’s alibi evidence with the testimony of the state’s witness, who positively identified him as the person who broke into her home on the date in question. See generally McCarty v. State, 161 Ga. App. 444, 446 (288 SE2d 249) (1982); Laws v. State, 153 Ga. App. 166 (1) (264 SE2d 700) (1980). The evidence as a whole was sufficient to enable a rational trier of fact to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. See generally Crawford v. State, 245 Ga. 89 (1) (263 SE2d 131) (1980).

2. The defendant’s complaint that he “cannot in his thinking reconcile the logic in acquittal of one act and conviction as to another similar act following as to time and place” establishes no ground for reversal. The two charges were completely distinct, as was the evidence in support of them.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Carley, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

313 S.E.2d 718, 169 Ga. App. 424, 1984 Ga. App. LEXIS 1574, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chambley-v-state-gactapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack