Higdon v. State

167 S.E. 782, 46 Ga. App. 346, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 59
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided February 3, 1933·No. 22863·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Guerry, J.

1. It was not error for the court to allow witnesses who had remained in the court-room to testify, although the rule for the sequestration of witnesses had been invoked. Such a witness who is in wilful disobedience of the order of the court may be attached for contempt, but he is not disqualified as a witness. “A party’s right to have the testimony of any witness, when material to the assertion of his rights, is, under the provisions of Code § 5858, unabridged, except by the exceptions therein specified, and is unaffected by § 1043 of the Penal Code which relates to the sequestration of witnesses.” Thomas v. State, 7 Ga. App. 615 (67 S. E. 707); May v. State, 90 Ga. 793 (17 S. E. 108) McWhorter v. State, 118 Ga. 55 (44 S. E. 873); Phillips v. State, 121 Ga. 358 (49 S. E. 290) ; Wallace v. Mize, 153 Ga. 374 (112 S. E. 724) ; Pope v. State, 42 Ga. App. 680 (157 S. E. 211).

2. The evidence supports the verdict, and there was no error in denying the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., amd MacIntyre, J., concur.

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

Higdon v. State, 167 S.E. 782, 46 Ga. App. 346, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 59 (Ga. Ct. App. 1933).

167 S.E. 782 (Higdon v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stevenson v. State
167 S.E. 783 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1933)