Lumpkin v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Lumpkin v. State

289 S.E.2d 274, 161 Ga. App. 53, 1982 Ga. App. LEXIS 1754

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 12, 1982

Docket62727

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 289 S.E.2d 274 (Lumpkin 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

Lumpkin v. State, 289 S.E.2d 274, 161 Ga. App. 53, 1982 Ga. App. LEXIS 1754 (Ga. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Shulman, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of two counts of burglary and one count of theft by receiving stolen property. He raises four enumerations of error, three of which take issue with the jury charge and a ruling of the trial court. The fourth enumeration involves the denial of appellant’s motion for a new trial, which motion was based upon the errors alleged in the first three enumerations. Inasmuch as appellant made no objection during the trial to any of the purported errors now enumerated and since he did not reserve his right to later object to the jury charge, he has waived his right to raise these issues on appeal. Jackson v. State, 246 Ga. 459, 460 (271 SE2d 855); McAllister v. State, 231 Ga. 368 (1) (202 SE2d 54). It follows that it was not error to deny appellant’s motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Birdsong and Sognier, JJ., concur.

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

Shulman, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of two counts of burglary and one count of theft by receiving stolen property. He raises four enumerations of error, three of which take issue with the jury charge and a ruling of the trial court. The fourth enumeration involves the denial of appellant’s motion for a new trial, which motion was based upon the errors alleged in the first three enumerations. Inasmuch as appellant made no objection during the trial to any of the purported errors now enumerated and since he did not reserve his right to later object to the jury charge, he has waived his right to raise these issues on appeal. Jackson v. State, 246 Ga. 459, 460 (271 SE2d 855); McAllister v. State, 231 Ga. 368 (1) (202 SE2d 54). It follows that it was not error to deny appellant’s motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Birdsong and Sognier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

289 S.E.2d 274, 161 Ga. App. 53, 1982 Ga. App. LEXIS 1754, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lumpkin-v-state-gactapp-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack