Davis v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Davis v. State

164 S.E. 164, 45 Ga. App. 248, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 268

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 30, 1932

Docket22216

StatusPublished

This text of 164 S.E. 164 (Davis 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

Davis v. State, 164 S.E. 164, 45 Ga. App. 248, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 268 (Ga. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, 0. J.

1. “A statement of an officer to one accused of crime, to the effect that it would be better for him to tell the truth about the case, does not necessarily, as a matter of law, render inadmissible as evidence a confession of guilt, made in the circumstances disclosed by the present record. With reference to confession evidence, what the law altogether abhors is the testimonial untrustworthiness of the confession. If the inducement is sufficient by possibility to elicit an untrue confession of guilt, then the confession is to be rejected; otherwise it is to be admitted under' proper instructions from the court.” Wilson v. State, 19 Ga. App. 759 (4) (92 S. E. 309).

2. Under the foregoing ruling and the facts of the instant case, the court did not err in admitting the testimony of an officer as to the alleged confession of the defendant; nor was it error, for any reason assigned, for the court to charge the jury upon the law of confessions.

3. The corpus delicti was established by the evidence, without the aid of the alleged confession; the verdict was authorized, and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affii-med.

Jenkins, P. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Broyles, 0. J.

1. “A statement of an officer to one accused of crime, to the effect that it would be better for him to tell the truth about the case, does not necessarily, as a matter of law, render inadmissible as evidence a confession of guilt, made in the circumstances disclosed by the present record. With reference to confession evidence, what the law altogether abhors is the testimonial untrustworthiness of the confession. If the inducement is sufficient by possibility to elicit an untrue confession of guilt, then the confession is to be rejected; otherwise it is to be admitted under' proper instructions from the court.” Wilson v. State, 19 Ga. App. 759 (4) (92 S. E. 309).

2. Under the foregoing ruling and the facts of the instant case, the court did not err in admitting the testimony of an officer as to the alleged confession of the defendant; nor was it error, for any reason assigned, for the court to charge the jury upon the law of confessions.

3. The corpus delicti was established by the evidence, without the aid of the alleged confession; the verdict was authorized, and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affii-med.

Jenkins, P. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 S.E. 164, 45 Ga. App. 248, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-state-gactapp-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack