Johnson v. State

102 S.E. 439, 150 Ga. 67, 1920 Ga. LEXIS 31
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMarch 9, 1920
DocketNo. 1563
StatusPublished
Cited by38 cases

This text of 102 S.E. 439 (Johnson v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Johnson v. State, 102 S.E. 439, 150 Ga. 67, 1920 Ga. LEXIS 31 (Ga. 1920).

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

1. It is improper for counsel for the State, on the trial of a defendant charged with crime, to state to the jury his belief that the defendant is guilty. Jones v. State, 123 Ga. 129 (51 S. E. 312) ; Broznack, v. State, 109 Ga. 514 (35 S. E. 123). But where the trial judge promptly expresses disapproval of the remarks, and instructs the jury not to consider them in rendering their verdict, the refusal to declare a mistrial on account of such remarks will not require the grant of a new trial.

2. It was not error to instruct the jury: “I charge you that proof of good character may in itself generate in the mind of the jury a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused. While that is true, if the proof is plain and convincing to the minds of the jury, satisfying their-minds beyond a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused, then they are authorized to convict, even though there may be proof of good character.”

3. The excerpt from the charge as to conspiracy, to which exception was taken, stated a correct principle of law.

(a) It is not a good assignment of error upon an instruction stating a correct principle of law applicable to the case, that the judge did not in the same connection instruct as to some other correct and applicable principle of law.

4. The rulings of the court upon the admissibility of evidence show no error.

5. The credibility of the witnesses was exclusively for the jury. The evidence submitted by the State, though entirely circumstantial, which the jury had a right to believe, was sufficient to support the verdict.

6. None of the grounds of the motion for new trial show cause for reversal.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Beck, P. J., absent on account of sickness.

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

Related

Hornsby v. State
436 S.E.2d 767 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1993)
Kelley v. State
281 S.E.2d 589 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1981)
Campbell v. State
238 S.E.2d 576 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1977)
Finch v. State
226 S.E.2d 779 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1976)
Walker v. State
208 S.E.2d 5 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)
Howard v. State
195 S.E.2d 14 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1972)
Moore v. State
187 S.E.2d 277 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1972)
Stuart v. State
180 S.E.2d 581 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1971)
Bridges v. State
178 S.E.2d 861 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1970)
Spell v. State
171 S.E.2d 285 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1969)
Dozier v. State
167 S.E.2d 670 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1969)
Ivy v. State
141 S.E.2d 541 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1965)
Purcell v. Hill
141 S.E.2d 152 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1965)
Morris v. State
104 S.E.2d 483 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1958)
State Highway Department v. Porter
99 S.E.2d 519 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1957)
Josey v. State
79 S.E.2d 64 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1953)
Waller v. State
56 S.E.2d 491 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1949)
Loomis v. State
51 S.E.2d 13 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1948)
Gossett v. State
203 Ga. 692 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1948)
Byrd v. State
35 S.E.2d 385 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1945)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
102 S.E. 439, 150 Ga. 67, 1920 Ga. LEXIS 31, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-state-ga-1920.