Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Cobb v. State

Cobb v. State

188 S.E.2d 260, 125 Ga. App. 556, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 1406
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 23, 1972
Docket46885
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 188 S.E.2d 260 (Cobb 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
Cobb v. State, 188 S.E.2d 260, 125 Ga. App. 556, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 1406 (Ga. Ct. App. 1972).

Opinion

Clark, Judge.

This appeal is from a judgment of conviction and sentence for the offense of incest. The . appeal was originally taken to the Supreme Court of 'Georgia wherein appellant attacked the constitutionality of that portion of the Act of 1856 (Ga. L. 1855-6, pp. 229, 231; Code § 59-806) relating to questions to be asked of prospective jurors-on voir dire.

As the constitutionality of the Code section has previously been upheld, and since, subsequent attack does not invoke the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court where jurisdiction of the subject matter is otherwise in this court, the case was transferred. See Cobb v. State, 228 Ga. 292 (185 SE2d 378).

1. In the enumerations remaining for this court’s .consideration appellant contends the State -failed to carry the burden of proving knowledge by the accused of the forbidden familial relationship, a necessary allegation of the indictment which charged -sexual intercouse with his daughter, "whom the accused knew to be his daughter.” This indictment complied with the statute (Code Ann. §26-2006; Ga. L. 1968, pp. 1249, 1299) which states "a person commits incest when he engages in sexual intercourse with a person to whom ’he knows he is related . . .” within the incestuous category.

The fact of the relationship is not disputed, having been proved- by the birth certificate which was admitted without objection. That fact together with portions of 'defendant’s lengthy unsworn statement, in which he ■ stated his children had "been with me all their lives” and that he worked for and provided for them was supplemented by evidence that the defendant upon apprehension .in flagrante delicto stated they were married. Knowledge may be inferred from circumstances. Birdsong v. State, 120 Ga. 850, 852 (48 SE 329); Rivers v. State, 118 Ga. 42 (2) (44 SE 859).

2. There was ample evidence to support the verdict.

*557 Argued February 7, 1972 Decided February 23, 1972. Chrietzberg & Anderson, L. C.. Chrietzberg, for appellant. H. Eugene Brown, District Attorney, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Jordan, P. J., and Deen, J., concur.

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

Related

Anthony Crawford v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012
Crawford v. State
732 S.E.2d 794 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012)
Earl v. State
449 S.E.2d 361 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1994)
Bennett v. State
415 S.E.2d 310 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
Rogers v. State
229 S.E.2d 132 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1976)
Walker v. State
226 S.E.2d 274 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1976)
Haire v. State
209 S.E.2d 681 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)
Golson v. State
203 S.E.2d 917 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
188 S.E.2d 260, 125 Ga. App. 556, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 1406, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cobb-v-state-gactapp-1972.