Glisson v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Glisson v. State

214 S.E.2d 386, 134 Ga. App. 380, 1975 Ga. App. LEXIS 2019

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 4, 1975

Docket50056

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 214 S.E.2d 386 (Glisson 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

Glisson v. State, 214 S.E.2d 386, 134 Ga. App. 380, 1975 Ga. App. LEXIS 2019 (Ga. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Quillian, Judge.

The defendant was tried and convicted for the offense of "driving under the influence.” He appealed to this court contending that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction. Held:

1. The cases which tend to sustain the defendant’s argument with regard to circumstantial evidence in a drunk driving case (for example, Waters v. State, 90 Ga. App. 329 (83 SE2d 25); Gunder v. State, 95 Ga. App. 176 (97 SE2d 381); Parrott v. State, 100 Ga. App. 652 (112 SE2d 271)), have been overruled. Stephens v. State, 127 Ga. App. 416, 424 (193 SE2d 870); Townsend v. State, 127 Ga. App. 797, 798 (195 SE2d 474).

2. Here the defendant’s car was overturned; he was found lying in a ditch with his feet entangled in the steering wheel of the car; the investigating officer noticed that the defendant’s speech was slurred and that from the odor of alcohol he had been drinking. An unobjected-to blood test revealed the defendant’s blood had an alcohol level of .18 (.10 gives rise to a presumption that the defendant was under the influence.) Code Ann. § 68-1625 (Ga. L. 1953, Nov. Sess., pp. 556, 575; 1966, pp. 70, 71; 1968, pp. 448, 449) repealed by Ga. L. 1974, pp. 633, 691.

The circumstantial evidence was sufficient to authorize the jury’s finding of guilty. Stephens v. State, 127 Ga. App. 416, supra; Townsend v. State, 127 Ga. App. 797, supra; Tutt v. State, 128 Ga.App. 636 (197 SE2d 432).

Judgment affirmed.

Pannell, P. J., and Clark, J., concur. *381 Richard D. Phillips, for appellant. B. Daniel Dubberly, Jr., Solicitor, for appellee.

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

Quillian, Judge.

The defendant was tried and convicted for the offense of "driving under the influence.” He appealed to this court contending that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction. Held:

1. The cases which tend to sustain the defendant’s argument with regard to circumstantial evidence in a drunk driving case (for example, Waters v. State, 90 Ga. App. 329 (83 SE2d 25); Gunder v. State, 95 Ga. App. 176 (97 SE2d 381); Parrott v. State, 100 Ga. App. 652 (112 SE2d 271)), have been overruled. Stephens v. State, 127 Ga. App. 416, 424 (193 SE2d 870); Townsend v. State, 127 Ga. App. 797, 798 (195 SE2d 474).

2. Here the defendant’s car was overturned; he was found lying in a ditch with his feet entangled in the steering wheel of the car; the investigating officer noticed that the defendant’s speech was slurred and that from the odor of alcohol he had been drinking. An unobjected-to blood test revealed the defendant’s blood had an alcohol level of .18 (.10 gives rise to a presumption that the defendant was under the influence.) Code Ann. § 68-1625 (Ga. L. 1953, Nov. Sess., pp. 556, 575; 1966, pp. 70, 71; 1968, pp. 448, 449) repealed by Ga. L. 1974, pp. 633, 691.

The circumstantial evidence was sufficient to authorize the jury’s finding of guilty. Stephens v. State, 127 Ga. App. 416, supra; Townsend v. State, 127 Ga. App. 797, supra; Tutt v. State, 128 Ga.App. 636 (197 SE2d 432).

Judgment affirmed.

Pannell, P. J., and Clark, J., concur. *381 Richard D. Phillips, for appellant. B. Daniel Dubberly, Jr., Solicitor, for appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

214 S.E.2d 386, 134 Ga. App. 380, 1975 Ga. App. LEXIS 2019, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glisson-v-state-gactapp-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack