Chatham v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Chatham v. State

278 S.E.2d 757, 157 Ga. App. 810, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 2018

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 6, 1981

Docket59493

StatusPublished

This text of 278 S.E.2d 757 (Chatham 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

Chatham v. State, 278 S.E.2d 757, 157 Ga. App. 810, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 2018 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Sognier, Judge.

Chatham appealed a ruling of the trial court denying his motion in bar of trial because he was placed in double jeopardy. We affirmed the judgment on the ground that the court had declared a mistrial properly, and that a charge given by the court based on a written request to charge was proper. Chatham v. State, 155 Ga. App. 154 (270 SE2d 274) (1980).

The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed the decision of this court and held that jeopardy attached at the aborted first trial because a mistrial became necessary as a result of unfair actions by the trial court and the district attorney, and the state could not take advantage of such an abuse by again putting appellant in jeopardy. The Supreme Court also held that citing a case as authority in a request to charge does not preclude appellant from complaining of additional language added by the court from the cited authority. Chatham v. State, 247 Ga. 95 (274 SE2d 473) (1981). Accordingly, our opinion of June 20,1980 is vacated and the judgment of the trial court is reversed.

Judgment reversed.

Deen, P. J., and Birdsong, J., concur. Gerald P. Word, for appellant. William F. Lee, Jr., District Attorney, Michael G. Kam, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

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

Sognier, Judge.

Chatham appealed a ruling of the trial court denying his motion in bar of trial because he was placed in double jeopardy. We affirmed the judgment on the ground that the court had declared a mistrial properly, and that a charge given by the court based on a written request to charge was proper. Chatham v. State, 155 Ga. App. 154 (270 SE2d 274) (1980).

The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed the decision of this court and held that jeopardy attached at the aborted first trial because a mistrial became necessary as a result of unfair actions by the trial court and the district attorney, and the state could not take advantage of such an abuse by again putting appellant in jeopardy. The Supreme Court also held that citing a case as authority in a request to charge does not preclude appellant from complaining of additional language added by the court from the cited authority. Chatham v. State, 247 Ga. 95 (274 SE2d 473) (1981). Accordingly, our opinion of June 20,1980 is vacated and the judgment of the trial court is reversed.

Judgment reversed.

Deen, P. J., and Birdsong, J., concur. Gerald P. Word, for appellant. William F. Lee, Jr., District Attorney, Michael G. Kam, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 S.E.2d 757, 157 Ga. App. 810, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 2018, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chatham-v-state-gactapp-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack