Home/Supreme Court of Georgia/Cox v. State

Cox v. State

139 S.E. 861, 165 Ga. 145, 1927 Ga. LEXIS 328
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedOctober 15, 1927
DocketNo. 6161
StatusPublished
Cited by62 cases

This text of 139 S.E. 861 (Cox 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
Cox v. State, 139 S.E. 861, 165 Ga. 145, 1927 Ga. LEXIS 328 (Ga. 1927).

Opinion

IIines, J.

1. When one is on trial charged with the commission of a crime, proof of a distinct, independent, and separate offense is never admissible, unless there is some logical connection between the two, from which it can be said that proof of the one tends to establish the other. This is the general rule, but there are some exceptions to it; as when the extraneous crime forms part of the res gestee; or is one of a system of mutually dependent crimes; or is evidence of guilty knowledge; or may hear upon the question of the identity of the accused,, or articles connected with the offense; or is evidence of prior attempts by the accused to commit the same crime upon the victim of the offense for which he stands charged; or where it tends to prove malice, intent, motive, or the like, if such an element enters into the offense charged. Penal Code (1910), § 1019; Cawthon v. State, 119 Ga. 395 (46 S. E. 897).

2. The defendant being on trial for rape alleged to have been committed on his daughter, a child under the age of fourteen years, it was error for the court to permit, over objection of the defendant, an elder sister of [146]*146tlie girl alleged to have been raped, to testify that the defendant had had frequent acts of intercourse with this witness during the period of time from her eleventh year to her fourteenth year of age, the objection urged by the defendant at the time to the admission of this proof being that it was evidence of a distinct and separate crime from the one on which the defendant was being tried. The admission of this evidence comes within the general rule above stated, and not within any of the exceptions above referred to. Moose v. State, 145 Ga. 361 (89 S. E. 335).

No. 6161. October 15, 1927. Eldon L. Bowen and H. D. Griffin, for plaintiff in error. George M. Napier, allorney-general, A. B. Spence, solicitor-general, and T. B. Gress, assistant attorney-general, contra.

3. As a new trial is granted because of the error dealt with in the foregoing headnotes, it is unnecessary to deal with the assignments of error touching the competency of certain jurors who tried the defendant, upon the ground that they were related to the prosecutor.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Morgan v. State
651 S.E.2d 833 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2007)
State v. Belt
505 S.E.2d 1 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1998)
Harris v. State
455 S.E.2d 387 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1995)
Williams v. State
409 S.E.2d 649 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1991)
Millwood v. State
296 S.E.2d 239 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1982)
Jimerson v. State
293 S.E.2d 513 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1982)
Mitchell v. State
281 S.E.2d 260 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1981)
Humphries v. State
269 S.E.2d 90 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1980)
Baker v. State
266 S.E.2d 477 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1980)
Hogsed v. State
258 S.E.2d 688 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1979)
Respess v. State
244 S.E.2d 251 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1978)
Favors v. State
243 S.E.2d 712 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1978)
Martin v. State
240 S.E.2d 231 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1977)
Morris v. State
240 S.E.2d 99 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1977)
Thomas v. State
238 S.E.2d 888 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1977)
Molisani v. State
235 S.E.2d 658 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1977)
Dunkum v. State
226 S.E.2d 133 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1976)
Deuser v. State
225 S.E.2d 758 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1976)
Campbell v. State
214 S.E.2d 656 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1975)
State v. Luke
209 S.E.2d 165 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
139 S.E. 861, 165 Ga. 145, 1927 Ga. LEXIS 328, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cox-v-state-ga-1927.