Hamm v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hamm v. State

247 S.E.2d 211, 146 Ga. App. 628, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2486

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided July 10, 1978·No. 56077·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Birdsong, Judge.

Hamm was convicted of armed robbery. His sole contention on appeal is that a statement signed by him was not voluntarily given because he was using drugs at the time the statement was made. On virtually identical facts, this same contention was decided adversely to appellant in Richardson v. State, 143 Ga. App. 846 (240 SE2d 217). See Little v. State, 142 Ga. App. 343 (235 SE2d 764). The trial court did not err in admitting into evidence appellant’s statement.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., and Shulman, J., concur.

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

Birdsong, Judge.

Hamm was convicted of armed robbery. His sole contention on appeal is that a statement signed by him was not voluntarily given because he was using drugs at the time the statement was made. On virtually identical facts, this same contention was decided adversely to appellant in Richardson v. State, 143 Ga. App. 846 (240 SE2d 217). See Little v. State, 142 Ga. App. 343 (235 SE2d 764). The trial court did not err in admitting into evidence appellant’s statement.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., and Shulman, J., concur.

Hamm v. State, 247 S.E.2d 211, 146 Ga. App. 628, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2486 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

247 S.E.2d 211 (Hamm v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related