Conroy v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Conroy v. State

271 S.E.2d 726, 155 Ga. App. 576, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2682

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 5, 1980

Docket60071

StatusPublished

This text of 271 S.E.2d 726 (Conroy 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

Conroy v. State, 271 S.E.2d 726, 155 Ga. App. 576, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2682 (Ga. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Shulman, Judge.

Defendant appeals her conviction of the offense of criminal attempt to commit theft by deception. For the reasons set forth in Division 3, we reverse.

1. Since our review of the record reveals that, contrary to appellant’s contentions, an affidavit was submitted in support of the accusation brought against defendant, appellant’s contentions of error predicated upon the lack of such affidavit are without merit.

2. Neither can we agree with appellant’s assertions of error on the general grounds. There was evidence presented at trial from which a rational trier of fact could have found defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the offense charged. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560).

3. However, we must agree that the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury on the offense charged, that is, the court’s failure to define the essential elements of the offense of criminal attempt to commit theft by deception (see Code Ann. §§ 26-1001 and 26-1803) constituted reversible error. While it is not incumbent upon the trial court to instruct the jury in the exact language of the Code, it is necessary that he instruct, even absent request, on the essential elements of the offense charged. Powers v. State, 150 Ga. App. 25 (3) (256 SE2d 637). See also Brooks v. State, 146 Ga. App. 519 (1) (246 SE2d 506). The trial court’s failure to do so mandates the reversal of its judgment.

Judgment reversed.

Quillian, P. J., and Carley, J., concur.

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

Shulman, Judge.

Defendant appeals her conviction of the offense of criminal attempt to commit theft by deception. For the reasons set forth in Division 3, we reverse.

1. Since our review of the record reveals that, contrary to appellant’s contentions, an affidavit was submitted in support of the accusation brought against defendant, appellant’s contentions of error predicated upon the lack of such affidavit are without merit.

2. Neither can we agree with appellant’s assertions of error on the general grounds. There was evidence presented at trial from which a rational trier of fact could have found defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the offense charged. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560).

3. However, we must agree that the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury on the offense charged, that is, the court’s failure to define the essential elements of the offense of criminal attempt to commit theft by deception (see Code Ann. §§ 26-1001 and 26-1803) constituted reversible error. While it is not incumbent upon the trial court to instruct the jury in the exact language of the Code, it is necessary that he instruct, even absent request, on the essential elements of the offense charged. Powers v. State, 150 Ga. App. 25 (3) (256 SE2d 637). See also Brooks v. State, 146 Ga. App. 519 (1) (246 SE2d 506). The trial court’s failure to do so mandates the reversal of its judgment.

Judgment reversed.

Quillian, P. J., and Carley, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 S.E.2d 726, 155 Ga. App. 576, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2682, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conroy-v-state-gactapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack