Mitchem v. State

185 S.E. 367, 53 Ga. App. 280, 1936 Ga. App. LEXIS 68
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedApril 24, 1936
Docket25341
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 185 S.E. 367 (Mitchem 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
Mitchem v. State, 185 S.E. 367, 53 Ga. App. 280, 1936 Ga. App. LEXIS 68 (Ga. Ct. App. 1936).

Opinion

MacIntyre, J.

This case does not come under the rule of arbitrarily disregarding the uneontradieted and unimpeached testimony of a witness, as stated in Hampton v. State, 6 Ga. App. 778 (65 S. E. 816), and [281]*281Gibbs v. State 8 Ga. App. 107 (2) (68 S. E. 742), but comes under the general rule that when evidence is contradictory the jury may believe the evidence which they think is most entitled to belief. Ford v. State, 92 Ga. 459, 461 (17 S. E. 667). The statement of the defendant that he would plead guilty of stealing the car if the officers would turn loose two men whom he claimed had nothing to do with the theft, his contradictory explanations (first stating that he did not know the name of the man from whom he bought the car, and later stating that he bought it from J. C. Brown, a person who was well known to him), and the concealing of the identity of the automobile in many ways, one of which was that the motor number on the car had been changed and altered, were sufficient to authorize the jury to find the defendant guilty on the first count of stealing the automobile, and guilty on the second count of changing and altering the automobile for the purpose of concealing and making its identification more difficult. The defendant’s objection to evidence was not meritorious.

Decided April 24, 1936.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Querry, J., concur. W. Paul Carpenter, Joseph JD. Lewis, for plaintiff in error. John A. Boykin, solicitor-general, John II. Hudson, J. W. Le-Craw, contra.

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

Related

Wachovia Mortgage Co. v. Moore
225 S.E.2d 460 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1976)
Young v. State
206 S.E.2d 536 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)
Hancock v. State
206 S.E.2d 104 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)
Bentley v. State
205 S.E.2d 904 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)
Stewart v. Staten
195 S.E.2d 251 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1973)
Greer v. State
147 S.E.2d 877 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1966)
Fortson v. State
25 S.E.2d 820 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1943)
Toney v. State
25 S.E.2d 85 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1943)
Parker v. State
10 S.E.2d 720 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
185 S.E. 367, 53 Ga. App. 280, 1936 Ga. App. LEXIS 68, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mitchem-v-state-gactapp-1936.