Hurt v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hurt v. State

305 S.E.2d 179, 166 Ga. App. 639, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2276

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 16, 1983

Docket65771

StatusPublished

This text of 305 S.E.2d 179 (Hurt 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

Hurt v. State, 305 S.E.2d 179, 166 Ga. App. 639, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2276 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

Shulman, Chief Judge.

Appellant was convicted of the armed robbery of a fivesome at a golf course. In his sole enumeration of error, appellant asserts that the trial court committed reversible error when it refused to grant his motion for a directed verdict of acquittal. Appellant contends that the only direct evidence against him was furnished by the testimony of an alleged co-conspirator and that, because it was not corroborated by other evidence, his motion should have been granted. We disagree. The alleged co-conspirator stated that he and appellant had robbed the golfers at gunpoint. Another state’s witness reported that appellant had told him that appellant had committed a robbery and had named the golfers as his victims. That witness also identified the gun used in the robbery as one which appellant had taken from the witness’ car and had returned to the witness after the robbery. Furthermore, one of the victims testified that appellant’s size, build, and complexion were the same as those of one of the perpetrators. The above-summarized evidence is more than slight evidence which tends to connect appellant with the crime or to lead to an inference that he is guilty and, therefore, is sufficient to corroborate the testimony of appellant’s alleged accomplice. Dickerson v. State, 161 Ga. App. 178 (1) (288 SE2d 131).

Judgment affirmed.

McMurray, P. J., and Birdsong, J., concur.

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

Shulman, Chief Judge.

Appellant was convicted of the armed robbery of a fivesome at a golf course. In his sole enumeration of error, appellant asserts that the trial court committed reversible error when it refused to grant his motion for a directed verdict of acquittal. Appellant contends that the only direct evidence against him was furnished by the testimony of an alleged co-conspirator and that, because it was not corroborated by other evidence, his motion should have been granted. We disagree. The alleged co-conspirator stated that he and appellant had robbed the golfers at gunpoint. Another state’s witness reported that appellant had told him that appellant had committed a robbery and had named the golfers as his victims. That witness also identified the gun used in the robbery as one which appellant had taken from the witness’ car and had returned to the witness after the robbery. Furthermore, one of the victims testified that appellant’s size, build, and complexion were the same as those of one of the perpetrators. The above-summarized evidence is more than slight evidence which tends to connect appellant with the crime or to lead to an inference that he is guilty and, therefore, is sufficient to corroborate the testimony of appellant’s alleged accomplice. Dickerson v. State, 161 Ga. App. 178 (1) (288 SE2d 131).

Judgment affirmed.

McMurray, P. J., and Birdsong, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 S.E.2d 179, 166 Ga. App. 639, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2276, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hurt-v-state-gactapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack