McRae v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

McRae v. State

306 S.E.2d 358, 167 Ga. App. 223, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2476

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 29, 1983

Docket66031

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 306 S.E.2d 358 (McRae 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

McRae v. State, 306 S.E.2d 358, 167 Ga. App. 223, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2476 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

Carley, Judge.

The state filed a petition seeking to revoke appellant’s probation because of numerous alleged violations of the terms of probation. Appellant appeals from the superior court’s order revoking the probation. Appellant argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the trial court’s revocation of probation. “In a proceeding of this type, the trial judge acts as the trier of fact with a very wide discretion which will not be controlled in the absence of a manifest abuse of such discretion. [Cits.]” Smallwood v. State, 163 Ga. App. 140 (293 SE2d 15) (1982). After a thorough review of the entire [224]*224record, we find that the evidence presented was sufficient to authorize the trial court’s revocation of appellant’s probation. See Adams v. State, 158 Ga. App. 529 (281 SE2d 250) (1981).

Decided June 29, 1983. William T. Straughan, for appellant. James L. Wiggins, District Attorney, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Banke, J., concur.

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

Carley, Judge.

The state filed a petition seeking to revoke appellant’s probation because of numerous alleged violations of the terms of probation. Appellant appeals from the superior court’s order revoking the probation. Appellant argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the trial court’s revocation of probation. “In a proceeding of this type, the trial judge acts as the trier of fact with a very wide discretion which will not be controlled in the absence of a manifest abuse of such discretion. [Cits.]” Smallwood v. State, 163 Ga. App. 140 (293 SE2d 15) (1982). After a thorough review of the entire [224]*224record, we find that the evidence presented was sufficient to authorize the trial court’s revocation of appellant’s probation. See Adams v. State, 158 Ga. App. 529 (281 SE2d 250) (1981).

Decided June 29, 1983. William T. Straughan, for appellant. James L. Wiggins, District Attorney, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Banke, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

306 S.E.2d 358, 167 Ga. App. 223, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2476, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcrae-v-state-gactapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack