Maddox v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Maddox v. State

198 S.E. 799, 58 Ga. App. 450, 1938 Ga. App. LEXIS 310

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 1, 1938

Docket26994

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 198 S.E. 799 (Maddox 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

Maddox v. State, 198 S.E. 799, 58 Ga. App. 450, 1938 Ga. App. LEXIS 310 (Ga. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. Where on the trial of one indicted for murder there was evidence which would have authorized the jury to find that the accused and the deceased, upon a sudden quarrel, mutually engaged in a mortal combat, the failure of the judge to give in charge to the jury the doctrine of “mutual combat” is “cause for a new trial, where the accused teas convicted of murder.” (Italics ours.) Waller v. State, 100 Ga. 320 (28 S. E. 77); Findley v. State, 125 Ga. 579 (3), 583 (54 S. E. 106) ; Hall v. State, 133 Ga. 177 (5) (65 S. E. 400). However, where (as in the instant ease) the accused was convicted of the lesser offense of voluntary manslaughter, and where the judge correctly charged generally on the subject of voluntary manslaughter and on the law of justifiable homicide, the failure to specifically charge on the subject of “mutual combat” is not cause for a new trial.

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. Where on the trial of one indicted for murder there was evidence which would have authorized the jury to find that the accused and the deceased, upon a sudden quarrel, mutually engaged in a mortal combat, the failure of the judge to give in charge to the jury the doctrine of “mutual combat” is “cause for a new trial, where the accused teas convicted of murder.” (Italics ours.) Waller v. State, 100 Ga. 320 (28 S. E. 77); Findley v. State, 125 Ga. 579 (3), 583 (54 S. E. 106) ; Hall v. State, 133 Ga. 177 (5) (65 S. E. 400). However, where (as in the instant ease) the accused was convicted of the lesser offense of voluntary manslaughter, and where the judge correctly charged generally on the subject of voluntary manslaughter and on the law of justifiable homicide, the failure to specifically charge on the subject of “mutual combat” is not cause for a new trial.

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 S.E. 799, 58 Ga. App. 450, 1938 Ga. App. LEXIS 310, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maddox-v-state-gactapp-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack