Dicks v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Dicks v. State

271 S.E.2d 727, 155 Ga. App. 591, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2691

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 5, 1980

Docket60282

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 271 S.E.2d 727 (Dicks 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

Dicks v. State, 271 S.E.2d 727, 155 Ga. App. 591, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2691 (Ga. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Deen, Chief Judge.

The defendant was indicted and convicted of the offense of burglary. The sole enumeration of error attacks the following portion of the charge: “The true question in all criminal cases is not whether it be possible that the conclusion to which the evidence points may be false, but is whether the evidence is sufficient to and does satisfy your minds and consciences to a moral and reasonable certainty and beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty as charged.” Code § 38-110, stating the quantum of evidence to sustain a conviction, is in substantially the same language. “The phrases, ‘to a moral and reasonable certainty’ and ‘beyond a reasonable doubt,’ as applied to the quality of proof in a case, are identical in meaning.” Austin v. State, 6 Ga. App. 211 (1) (64 SE 670) (1909); Bivins v. State, 29 Ga. App. 49 (1) (113 SE 57) (1922). Nor was the instruction complained of an expression of opinion. Cf. Smith v. State, 170 Ga. 234 (3) (152 SE 482) (1929).

Judgment affirmed.

Birdsong and Sognier, JJ., concur.

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

Deen, Chief Judge.

The defendant was indicted and convicted of the offense of burglary. The sole enumeration of error attacks the following portion of the charge: “The true question in all criminal cases is not whether it be possible that the conclusion to which the evidence points may be false, but is whether the evidence is sufficient to and does satisfy your minds and consciences to a moral and reasonable certainty and beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty as charged.” Code § 38-110, stating the quantum of evidence to sustain a conviction, is in substantially the same language. “The phrases, ‘to a moral and reasonable certainty’ and ‘beyond a reasonable doubt,’ as applied to the quality of proof in a case, are identical in meaning.” Austin v. State, 6 Ga. App. 211 (1) (64 SE 670) (1909); Bivins v. State, 29 Ga. App. 49 (1) (113 SE 57) (1922). Nor was the instruction complained of an expression of opinion. Cf. Smith v. State, 170 Ga. 234 (3) (152 SE 482) (1929).

Judgment affirmed.

Birdsong and Sognier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 S.E.2d 727, 155 Ga. App. 591, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2691, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dicks-v-state-gactapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack