Mickens v. State
This text of 99 S.E. 779 (Mickens v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. On the trial of one indicted for murder the court properly held a person incompetent who, in reply to a statutory question on the voir dire, testified: “I am opposed to capital punishment in cases of circumstantial evidence.” Neither the trial judge nor any one else can anticipate with any degree of certainty the exact .character of all the evidence that may be developed and submitted on a trial. 24 Cyc. 310, and eases cited in notes 96 and 97.
(a) Another person, who, in answer to the same question, testified: “I am opposed to capital punishment in most instances,” was obviously incompetent to serve as a juror in the case.
2. Failure of the court to instruct as to the law of voluntary manslaughter was not error, as in no view of the evidence was that offense involved.
3. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the refusal of a new trial was not error.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
99 S.E. 779, 149 Ga. 185, 1919 Ga. LEXIS 190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mickens-v-state-ga-1919.