Harris v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Harris v. State

254 S.E.2d 518, 149 Ga. App. 374, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 1855

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 16, 1979

Docket57125

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 254 S.E.2d 518 (Harris 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

Harris v. State, 254 S.E.2d 518, 149 Ga. App. 374, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 1855 (Ga. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

Birdsong, Judge.

Michael Harris was convicted of forgery in the first degree and sentenced to serve five years. He moved for a new trial asserting the general grounds. He brings this appeal enumerating as error the denial of his motion for new trial still arguing the general grounds. Held:

In substance Harris argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the findings of guilt. The only real issue was whether at the time Harris presented the check for encashment, Harris knew that the check had been forged and whether Harris intended to defraud the victim.

As to the general grounds, this court is bound by the "any evidence” rule and must accept the state’s version of the evidence, as was done by the jury and the trial judge. Rhodes v. State, 239 Ga. 257, 259 (236 SE2d 609); Dunn v. State, 141 Ga. App. 853 (1) (234 SE2d 687). The evidence of the single issue was in conflict, the jury resolved the issue against the appellant, and the evidence adequately supports the verdict of the jury. Griffin v. State, 237 Ga. 532 (228 SE2d 908). The trial court properly denied the motion for new trial based on the general grounds.

Judgment affirmed.

Quillian, P. J., and Smith, J., concur.

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

Birdsong, Judge.

Michael Harris was convicted of forgery in the first degree and sentenced to serve five years. He moved for a new trial asserting the general grounds. He brings this appeal enumerating as error the denial of his motion for new trial still arguing the general grounds. Held:

In substance Harris argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the findings of guilt. The only real issue was whether at the time Harris presented the check for encashment, Harris knew that the check had been forged and whether Harris intended to defraud the victim.

As to the general grounds, this court is bound by the "any evidence” rule and must accept the state’s version of the evidence, as was done by the jury and the trial judge. Rhodes v. State, 239 Ga. 257, 259 (236 SE2d 609); Dunn v. State, 141 Ga. App. 853 (1) (234 SE2d 687). The evidence of the single issue was in conflict, the jury resolved the issue against the appellant, and the evidence adequately supports the verdict of the jury. Griffin v. State, 237 Ga. 532 (228 SE2d 908). The trial court properly denied the motion for new trial based on the general grounds.

Judgment affirmed.

Quillian, P. J., and Smith, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 S.E.2d 518, 149 Ga. App. 374, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 1855, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-state-gactapp-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack