Franklin v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Franklin v. State

315 S.E.2d 674, 169 Ga. App. 934, 1984 Ga. App. LEXIS 1764

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 23, 1984

Docket67047

StatusPublished

This text of 315 S.E.2d 674 (Franklin 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

Franklin v. State, 315 S.E.2d 674, 169 Ga. App. 934, 1984 Ga. App. LEXIS 1764 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Sognier, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol and being an Habitual Violator. He contends on appeal the trial court erred by admitting State’s Exhibit 3 into evidence over objection. The exhibit was a certified copy of a plea, indictment and sentence of probation for operating a motor vehicle after being declared an Habitual Violator.

The state offered the exhibit to show that appellant knew he was an Habitual Violator. At the time the exhibit was admitted the state had already put into evidence, without objection, a written notification to appellant that he had been declared an Habitual Violator, and a return receipt card signed by appellant acknowledging that he had received such notification. Appellant argues that because evidence establishing knowledge that he was an Habitual Violator was already before the jury, the only purpose in offering Exhibit 3 was to prejudice and inflame the jury.

We find no error in admission of the exhibit, since evidence that appellant was an Habitual Violator was already before the jury and such evidence had been admitted without objection. The fact that Exhibit 3 was cumulative does not render it inadmissible; just as more than one witness may testify to a fact, so may there be more than one document tending to prove a fact. Warren v. Gray, 90 Ga. App. 398, 402 (7) (83 SE2d 86) (1954).

Judgment affirmed.

Quillian, P. J., and Pope, J., concur.

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

Sognier, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol and being an Habitual Violator. He contends on appeal the trial court erred by admitting State’s Exhibit 3 into evidence over objection. The exhibit was a certified copy of a plea, indictment and sentence of probation for operating a motor vehicle after being declared an Habitual Violator.

The state offered the exhibit to show that appellant knew he was an Habitual Violator. At the time the exhibit was admitted the state had already put into evidence, without objection, a written notification to appellant that he had been declared an Habitual Violator, and a return receipt card signed by appellant acknowledging that he had received such notification. Appellant argues that because evidence establishing knowledge that he was an Habitual Violator was already before the jury, the only purpose in offering Exhibit 3 was to prejudice and inflame the jury.

We find no error in admission of the exhibit, since evidence that appellant was an Habitual Violator was already before the jury and such evidence had been admitted without objection. The fact that Exhibit 3 was cumulative does not render it inadmissible; just as more than one witness may testify to a fact, so may there be more than one document tending to prove a fact. Warren v. Gray, 90 Ga. App. 398, 402 (7) (83 SE2d 86) (1954).

Judgment affirmed.

Quillian, P. J., and Pope, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

315 S.E.2d 674, 169 Ga. App. 934, 1984 Ga. App. LEXIS 1764, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/franklin-v-state-gactapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack