Lyons v. State

168 S.E. 911, 46 Ga. App. 662, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 167
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 24, 1933
Docket22861
StatusPublished

This text of 168 S.E. 911 (Lyons 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
Lyons v. State, 168 S.E. 911, 46 Ga. App. 662, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 167 (Ga. Ct. App. 1933).

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. ‘“To sustain a conviction [of a felony] upon the testimony of an accomplice, there must be corroborating circumstances which, in themselves and independently of the testimony of the accomplice, directly connect the defendant with the crime, or lead to the inference that he is guilty (italics ours).” Childers v. State, 52 Ga. 106; Baker v. State, 14 Ga. App. 578 (4), 585 (80 S. E. 805) ; Stokes v. State, 19 Ga. App. 235, 238 (91 S. E. 271). Facts which create merely a grave suspicion of the defendant’s guilt are insufficient to corroborate the testimony of the accomplice (McCalla v. State, 66 Ga. 346). ‘Even where the facts in proof so far agree with the evidence of the accomplice as well-nigh to convert a grave suspicion against the accused into a moral conviction of his guilt, yet if these facts, when considered entirely apart from and independently of the evidence of the accomplice, fail in themselves, and without regard to the testimony of the accomplice, to connect the accused with the commission of the crime, a conviction is unauthorized.’ Stokes v. State, supra.” Jolly v. State, 41 Ga. App. 494 (153 S. E. 432).

2. Under the foregoing ruling and the facts of the instant case, there was no sufficient corroboration of the testimony of the accomplice, and the defendant’s conviction of the offense of arson was unauthorized, and the refusal to grant him a new trial was error. In view of this ruling, which controls the case, the special assignments of error are not considered. Judgment reversed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur. J. A. Mitchell, E. P. & J. Cecil Davis, for plaintiff in error. M. L. Felts, solicitor-general, contra.

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

Related

Childers v. State
52 Ga. 106 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1874)
McCalla v. State
66 Ga. 346 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1881)
Baker v. State
81 S.E. 805 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1914)
Stokes v. State
91 S.E. 271 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Jolly v. State
153 S.E. 432 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1930)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
168 S.E. 911, 46 Ga. App. 662, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lyons-v-state-gactapp-1933.