In the Interest of F.T.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

In the Interest of F.T.

299 S.E.2d 112, 165 Ga. App. 4, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 1740

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 4, 1983

Docket64614, 64615

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 299 S.E.2d 112 (In the Interest of F.T.) 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

In the Interest of F.T., 299 S.E.2d 112, 165 Ga. App. 4, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 1740 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

Sognier, Judge.

L. T. was found guilty of rape and F. T. was found guilty of aggravated assault. Appellants were adjudicated delinquents by the Juvenile Court of Dougherty County. They contend on appeal that the trial court erred by denying their motion for a directed verdict of acquittal based upon consent of the victim.

The victim’s testimony describing a forcible attack against her will was supported by testimony that after the incident she ran out of the house crying, and that she immediately told her sister she had been raped and to call the police. Although appellants testified that the victim consented to intercourse and that they used no force against her, the issue is one of the credibility of witnesses and falls within the province of the trier of fact. Melson v. State, 157 Ga. App. 268 (277 SE2d 284) (1981); Shirley v. State, 148 Ga. App. 96, 97 (1) (251 SE2d 57) (1978). “Where the testimony of the state and that of the defendant [s] are (sic) in conflict, the [fact finder] is the final arbiter [cits.], and ... the evidence must be construed so as to uphold the verdict even where there are discrepancies.” Shirley, supra.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Pope, J., concur.

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

Sognier, Judge.

L. T. was found guilty of rape and F. T. was found guilty of aggravated assault. Appellants were adjudicated delinquents by the Juvenile Court of Dougherty County. They contend on appeal that the trial court erred by denying their motion for a directed verdict of acquittal based upon consent of the victim.

The victim’s testimony describing a forcible attack against her will was supported by testimony that after the incident she ran out of the house crying, and that she immediately told her sister she had been raped and to call the police. Although appellants testified that the victim consented to intercourse and that they used no force against her, the issue is one of the credibility of witnesses and falls within the province of the trier of fact. Melson v. State, 157 Ga. App. 268 (277 SE2d 284) (1981); Shirley v. State, 148 Ga. App. 96, 97 (1) (251 SE2d 57) (1978). “Where the testimony of the state and that of the defendant [s] are (sic) in conflict, the [fact finder] is the final arbiter [cits.], and ... the evidence must be construed so as to uphold the verdict even where there are discrepancies.” Shirley, supra.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Pope, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

299 S.E.2d 112, 165 Ga. App. 4, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 1740, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-ft-gactapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack