Lackey v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Lackey v. State

232 S.E.2d 642, 141 Ga. App. 149, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 1801

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 28, 1977

Docket53115

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 232 S.E.2d 642 (Lackey 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

Lackey v. State, 232 S.E.2d 642, 141 Ga. App. 149, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 1801 (Ga. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Stolz, Judge.

The appellants are three brothers who were convicted of the burglary of two Barrow County homes. On the day of the burglaries, appellant Robert Lackey and two unidentified persons were seen by two witnesses in a certain car described by make, color, and license number, in the vicinity óf the burglarized homes acting in a suspicious manner. Later that day, the three appellants arrived at their residence in the car observed earlier. A few minutes later they were arrested by the sheriff and a deputy. Goods missing from the burglarized houses were found in the trunk of the car in question, in the appellants’ residence, and in the physical possession of one of the appellants.

The appellants contest their conviction on general grounds, it being contended that there was only insufficient, circumstantial evidence of their guilt. However, McLean v. State, 140 Ga. App. 229 (2) (1976), and Floyd v. State, 137 Ga. App. 181 (3) (223 SE2d 230) (1976), indicate that the evidence in this case was sufficient to support a conviction.

Judgment affirmed.

Quillian, P. J., and Shulmán, J., concur.

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

Stolz, Judge.

The appellants are three brothers who were convicted of the burglary of two Barrow County homes. On the day of the burglaries, appellant Robert Lackey and two unidentified persons were seen by two witnesses in a certain car described by make, color, and license number, in the vicinity óf the burglarized homes acting in a suspicious manner. Later that day, the three appellants arrived at their residence in the car observed earlier. A few minutes later they were arrested by the sheriff and a deputy. Goods missing from the burglarized houses were found in the trunk of the car in question, in the appellants’ residence, and in the physical possession of one of the appellants.

The appellants contest their conviction on general grounds, it being contended that there was only insufficient, circumstantial evidence of their guilt. However, McLean v. State, 140 Ga. App. 229 (2) (1976), and Floyd v. State, 137 Ga. App. 181 (3) (223 SE2d 230) (1976), indicate that the evidence in this case was sufficient to support a conviction.

Judgment affirmed.

Quillian, P. J., and Shulmán, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

232 S.E.2d 642, 141 Ga. App. 149, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 1801, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lackey-v-state-gactapp-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack