Kirkland v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Kirkland v. State

19 S.E.2d 787, 67 Ga. App. 256, 1942 Ga. App. LEXIS 358

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 9, 1942

Docket29383.

StatusPublished

This text of 19 S.E.2d 787 (Kirkland 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

Kirkland v. State, 19 S.E.2d 787, 67 Ga. App. 256, 1942 Ga. App. LEXIS 358 (Ga. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. In misdemeanors there are no accessories, but in such cases, “Whether the indictment is joint or several, any particular defendant accused therein of having committed the misdemeanor may be convicted by proof either that he directly and personally enacted the criminal transaction, or that he procured, counseled, commanded, aided, or abetted the criminal transaction of another, who was the direct and immediate actor.” Loeb v. State, 6 Ga. App. 23 (1-a), 30 (64 S. E. 338); Thomas v. State, 65 Ga. App. 749 (16 S. E. 2d, 447).

2. In a criminal case, evidence as to the flight of the accused from the scene of the crime is a circumstance which the jury, or the judge, sitting as both judge and jury, may consider in determining his guilt. Jones v. State, 123 Ga. 129 (51 S. E. 312); Grant v. State, 122 Ga. 740 (50 S. E. 946); Brooks v. State, 63 Ga. App. 575, 580 (11 S. E. 2d, 688).

3. Applying the foregoing rulings to the facts of this case, the trial judge, without the intervention of a jury, was authorized, under the evidence submitted, to find the defendant guilty of the misdemeanor charged; and the judge of the superior court did not err in overruling the petition for certiorari, which was based solely upon the ground that the finding of the trial judge was not authorized by the evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Gardner, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. In misdemeanors there are no accessories, but in such cases, “Whether the indictment is joint or several, any particular defendant accused therein of having committed the misdemeanor may be convicted by proof either that he directly and personally enacted the criminal transaction, or that he procured, counseled, commanded, aided, or abetted the criminal transaction of another, who was the direct and immediate actor.” Loeb v. State, 6 Ga. App. 23 (1-a), 30 (64 S. E. 338); Thomas v. State, 65 Ga. App. 749 (16 S. E. 2d, 447).

2. In a criminal case, evidence as to the flight of the accused from the scene of the crime is a circumstance which the jury, or the judge, sitting as both judge and jury, may consider in determining his guilt. Jones v. State, 123 Ga. 129 (51 S. E. 312); Grant v. State, 122 Ga. 740 (50 S. E. 946); Brooks v. State, 63 Ga. App. 575, 580 (11 S. E. 2d, 688).

3. Applying the foregoing rulings to the facts of this case, the trial judge, without the intervention of a jury, was authorized, under the evidence submitted, to find the defendant guilty of the misdemeanor charged; and the judge of the superior court did not err in overruling the petition for certiorari, which was based solely upon the ground that the finding of the trial judge was not authorized by the evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Gardner, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 S.E.2d 787, 67 Ga. App. 256, 1942 Ga. App. LEXIS 358, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kirkland-v-state-gactapp-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack