Cole v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Cole v. State

173 S.E. 655, 178 Ga. 674, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 133

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMarch 14, 1934

DocketNo. 9884

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 173 S.E. 655 (Cole 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

Cole v. State, 173 S.E. 655, 178 Ga. 674, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 133 (Ga. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Bell, J.

1. There being some direct evidence of the defendant’s guilt, the court did not err in failing to charge the jury on the law of circumstantial evidence. Brannon v. State, 140 Ga. 787 (7) (80 S. E. 7) ; Wilson v. State, 152 Ga. 337 (110 S. E. 8) ; Crumady v. State, 168 Ga. 457, 463 (148 S. E. 157).

[675]*675No. 9884. March 14, 1934. Joseph B. Webb and Carlisle Cobb, for plaintiff in error. M. J. Yeomans, attorney-general, Henry H. West, solicitor-general, B. B. Murphy and John T. Coree, assistant attorneys-general, contra.

2. There is no merit in the contention that the court should have instructed the jury that if they found that no confession was made, “the cáse would stand entirely and wholly upon circumstantial evidence, in which case the rule of evidence as laid down in section 1010 of the Penal Code of Georgia would be the rule of law for the jury to follow” in reaching a verdict. There was some direct evidence of the defendant’s guilt, independently of any confession. See Smith v. State, 125 Ga. 296 (54 S. E. 127).

3. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the court did not err in refusing a new trial. ■ Judgment affirmed.

All of the Justices concur.

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

Bell, J.

1. There being some direct evidence of the defendant’s guilt, the court did not err in failing to charge the jury on the law of circumstantial evidence. Brannon v. State, 140 Ga. 787 (7) (80 S. E. 7) ; Wilson v. State, 152 Ga. 337 (110 S. E. 8) ; Crumady v. State, 168 Ga. 457, 463 (148 S. E. 157).

[675]*675No. 9884. March 14, 1934. Joseph B. Webb and Carlisle Cobb, for plaintiff in error. M. J. Yeomans, attorney-general, Henry H. West, solicitor-general, B. B. Murphy and John T. Coree, assistant attorneys-general, contra.

2. There is no merit in the contention that the court should have instructed the jury that if they found that no confession was made, “the cáse would stand entirely and wholly upon circumstantial evidence, in which case the rule of evidence as laid down in section 1010 of the Penal Code of Georgia would be the rule of law for the jury to follow” in reaching a verdict. There was some direct evidence of the defendant’s guilt, independently of any confession. See Smith v. State, 125 Ga. 296 (54 S. E. 127).

3. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the court did not err in refusing a new trial. ■ Judgment affirmed.

All of the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

173 S.E. 655, 178 Ga. 674, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cole-v-state-ga-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack