Daniel v. State
This text of 187 S.E. 36 (Daniel 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.
Opinions
1. The preliminary evidence was sufficient to admit proof of statements of the deceased as dying declarations. Furthermore, the statements were not prejudicial to the movant, since they did not in any way tend to prove his guilt, showing only that the deceased was killed by Marvin Honea, about which there was no issue, and the complicity of the movant being dependent solely on other evidence.
2. Marvin Honea, who had been previously tried and convicted and was under a sentence, was introduced as a witness for the State, and on [876]*876cross-examination was asked the following questions: (1) “Are you preparing to meet your God?” (2) “The only people that can save you now from the electric chair is the solicitor-general’s office or the Governor of the State of Georgia. Isn’t that true?” The court refused to allow the witness to answer these questions, and the movant assigned these rulings as error. It does not appear that any substantial right of the movant was violated, and these assignments do not show cause for a reversal. Code, § 38-1705; City Bank of Macon v. Kent, 57 Ga. 283 (16); McCray v. State, 134 Ga. 416 (4) (68 S. E. 62, 20 Ann. Cas. 101); Eugee v. State, 159 Ga. 604 (5) (126 S. E. 471).
3. The general grounds of the motion for a new trial are not insisted on. The court did not err in overruling the motion.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
187 S.E. 36, 182 Ga. 875, 1936 Ga. LEXIS 585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daniel-v-state-ga-1936.