Elmore v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Elmore v. State

159 S.E.2d 744, 117 Ga. App. 104, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 987

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 17, 1968

Docket43266

StatusPublished

This text of 159 S.E.2d 744 (Elmore 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

Elmore v. State, 159 S.E.2d 744, 117 Ga. App. 104, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 987 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Hall, Judge.

1. The testimony for the State and for the defendant was in conflict concerning the occurrence in which the defendant, a deputy sheriff, was charged with the crime of shooting at another. There was evidence that thé person allegedly shot at was driving on the highway, and the defendant and another officer pursued him and accused him of a traffic violation. There was testimony that after the officers arrested him the defendant stated in the presence of others that he had shot at the person, and there was testimony to the contrary. The evidence of this admission by the defendant and other corroborating evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.

2. Neither the record nor the enumerations of error show that the defendant objected at the trial to any charge by the court to the jury, or to the court’s failure to give any charge the defendant had requested or considered necessary. The defendant’s enumerations of error on charges and omissions to charge are without merit. Barnes v. State, 115 Ga. App. 431 (154 SE2d 878); Metropolitan Transit System v. Barnette, 115 Ga. App. 17 (153 SE2d 656).

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, P. J., and Quillian, J., concur.

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

Hall, Judge.

1. The testimony for the State and for the defendant was in conflict concerning the occurrence in which the defendant, a deputy sheriff, was charged with the crime of shooting at another. There was evidence that thé person allegedly shot at was driving on the highway, and the defendant and another officer pursued him and accused him of a traffic violation. There was testimony that after the officers arrested him the defendant stated in the presence of others that he had shot at the person, and there was testimony to the contrary. The evidence of this admission by the defendant and other corroborating evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.

2. Neither the record nor the enumerations of error show that the defendant objected at the trial to any charge by the court to the jury, or to the court’s failure to give any charge the defendant had requested or considered necessary. The defendant’s enumerations of error on charges and omissions to charge are without merit. Barnes v. State, 115 Ga. App. 431 (154 SE2d 878); Metropolitan Transit System v. Barnette, 115 Ga. App. 17 (153 SE2d 656).

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, P. J., and Quillian, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

159 S.E.2d 744, 117 Ga. App. 104, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 987, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elmore-v-state-gactapp-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack