Limbrick v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Limbrick v. State

263 S.E.2d 502, 152 Ga. App. 615, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 3063

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 30, 1979

Docket58544

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 263 S.E.2d 502 (Limbrick 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

Limbrick v. State, 263 S.E.2d 502, 152 Ga. App. 615, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 3063 (Ga. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

Smith, Judge.

We affirm appellant’s conviction of rape, aggravated sodomy, kidnapping and robbery.

1. Citing Code § 27-2202, appellant contends the trial court erred in allowing both the assistant district attorney and the district attorney to present the state’s argument, which, in time sequence, was the middle one. That contention is meritless. The above Code section reads: "Not more than two counsel shall be permitted to argue any cause for each side, except by express leave of the court; and in no case shall more than one counsel be heard in conclusion.” We agree with the state and the trial court that that law forbids more than one counsel to present the argument last to be heard by the jury. That is, the final clause of that section applies to the party exercising the privilege of the final jury argument chronologically, the "last say.” Here, appellant not the state, had that argument.

*616 Submitted September 12, 1979 — Decided November 30, 1979. William F. Braziel, Sr., for appellant. Andrew J. Ryan, III, District Attorney, Robert M. Hitch, HI, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

2. Appellant’s remaining enumerations of error concern the trial court’s use of its inherent discretion in conducting its courtroom. We find no abuse. See Bryan v. State, 148 Ga. App. 428 (251 SE2d 338) (1978).

Judgment affirmed.

Quillian, P. J, and Birdsong, J., concur.

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

Smith, Judge.

We affirm appellant’s conviction of rape, aggravated sodomy, kidnapping and robbery.

1. Citing Code § 27-2202, appellant contends the trial court erred in allowing both the assistant district attorney and the district attorney to present the state’s argument, which, in time sequence, was the middle one. That contention is meritless. The above Code section reads: "Not more than two counsel shall be permitted to argue any cause for each side, except by express leave of the court; and in no case shall more than one counsel be heard in conclusion.” We agree with the state and the trial court that that law forbids more than one counsel to present the argument last to be heard by the jury. That is, the final clause of that section applies to the party exercising the privilege of the final jury argument chronologically, the "last say.” Here, appellant not the state, had that argument.

*616 Submitted September 12, 1979 — Decided November 30, 1979. William F. Braziel, Sr., for appellant. Andrew J. Ryan, III, District Attorney, Robert M. Hitch, HI, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

2. Appellant’s remaining enumerations of error concern the trial court’s use of its inherent discretion in conducting its courtroom. We find no abuse. See Bryan v. State, 148 Ga. App. 428 (251 SE2d 338) (1978).

Judgment affirmed.

Quillian, P. J, and Birdsong, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 S.E.2d 502, 152 Ga. App. 615, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 3063, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/limbrick-v-state-gactapp-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack