Hooks v. State

226 S.E.2d 765, 138 Ga. App. 539, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 2225
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedApril 21, 1976
Docket52071
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 226 S.E.2d 765 (Hooks 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
Hooks v. State, 226 S.E.2d 765, 138 Ga. App. 539, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 2225 (Ga. Ct. App. 1976).

Opinion

Evans, Judge.

Defendant was indicted and tried for the offense of aggravated assault. A mistrial resulted when the jurors could not reach a verdict. On his next trial he was convicted and sentenced to 10 years. Defendant appeals. Held:

1. Defendant’s first contention is that he had an affray with another in a restaurant and since the "victim” of the alleged aggravated assault had plead guilty to the offense of affray, the evidence was insufficient to convict him of a provoked assault on the victim with a deadly weapon (a knife). But the plea of guilty of the victim to the offense of affray is insufficient to demand a finding that this defendant was not guilty of aggravated assault. The mere fact that the defendant did not initiate the fight does not necessarily show that he was not guilty of aggravated assault with a knife, a deadly weapon. The evidence was sufficient to support the verdict. See Geiger v. State, 129 Ga. App. 488, 503 (199 SE2d 861); Ingram v. State, 204 Ga. 164, 184 (48 SE2d 891).

2. A retrial following a mistrial caused by a failure of the jury to agree on a verdict is not a case of double jeopardy in this state. See in this connection Bush v. State, 117 Ga. App. 310 (160 SE2d 456); Harwell v. State, 230 Ga. 480 (197 SE2d 708). It was within the discretion of the trial court to discharge the jury when they were unable to agree on a verdict. Defendant contends that the court failed to give the jury sufficient time to resolve its *540 differences and to deliberate further, there being only a short period of deliberation. This alone is insufficient to show that the trial court abused its discretion by granting amistrial. See Hyde v. State, 196 Ga. 475 (1), 479 (26 SE2d 744); Cameron v. Caldwell, 232 Ga. 611 (208 SE2d 441).

Submitted April 8, 1976 Decided April 21, 1976 Rehearing denied May 6, 1976. Durden, Durden & Allen, Rodney L. Allen, for appellant. William S. Lee, District Attorney, Loring A. Gray, Jr., Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

3. Further, defendant failed to offer a plea of former jeopardy before going to trial. A plea of former jeopardy is a personal privilege and may be waived. See Key v. State, 84 Ga. App. 599, 600 (66 SE2d 773); Denson v. State, 209 Ga. 355 (72 SE2d 725); Phelps v. State, 130 Ga. App. 344 (203 SE2d 320).

4. There is no merit in any of the errors enumerated.

Judgment affirmed.

Pannell, P. J., and Marshall, J., concur.

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

Related

Allaben v. State
787 S.E.2d 711 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2016)
William Riddick v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2013
Riddick v. State
740 S.E.2d 244 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2013)
Ramirez v. State
456 S.E.2d 657 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1995)
State v. Evans
384 S.E.2d 404 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
McClure v. State
345 S.E.2d 922 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1986)
Murff v. State
302 S.E.2d 697 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1983)
Carter v. State
292 S.E.2d 565 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1982)
State v. Miyazaki
645 P.2d 1340 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1982)
Drake v. THE STATE
284 S.E.2d 109 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1981)
Russell v. State
263 S.E.2d 689 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1979)
Kelly v. State
245 S.E.2d 20 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
226 S.E.2d 765, 138 Ga. App. 539, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 2225, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hooks-v-state-gactapp-1976.