Frazier v. City of Atlanta

80 S.E. 209, 14 Ga. App. 109, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 432
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided December 9, 1913·No. 5274·Published

Opinion

Pottle, J.

1. The defendant in a criminal case can not be sworn as a witness, even by his own consent. He may make an unsworn statement, and may, if he sees proper to do so, answer any questions propounded to him on cross-examination. Penal Code, § 1036. This statute is applicable to trials in a municipal court for violations of ordinances of the city. Williams v. Hazlehurst, 11 Ga. App. 194 (74 S. E. 1039).

2. Where one on trial for the violation of a municipal ordinance did not object to being cross-examined by a policeman who instituted the prosecution, and answered the questions thus propounded to him, without in . any way claiming his right not to be cross-examined, he will not be allowed to complain for the first time in the reviewing court that he was subjected to cross-examination without his consent.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Frazier v. City of Atlanta, 80 S.E. 209, 14 Ga. App. 109, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 432 (Ga. Ct. App. 1913).

80 S.E. 209 (Frazier v. City of Atlanta) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Williams v. City of Hazlehurst
74 S.E. 1039 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1912)