Morris v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Morris v. State

229 S.E.2d 110, 139 Ga. App. 630, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 1919

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 27, 1976

Docket52514

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 229 S.E.2d 110 (Morris 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

Morris v. State, 229 S.E.2d 110, 139 Ga. App. 630, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 1919 (Ga. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Stolz, Judge.

In the defendant’s trial for driving under the influence of alcohol, where the judge had sustained the defendant’s motion in limine to suppress evidence pertaining to the results of an intoximeter test administered illegally under Code Ann. § 68A-902.1 (a) (3), (4) (Ga. L. 1974, pp. 633, 672) and Nelson v. State, 135 Ga. App. 212 (217 SE2d 450) (1975), a gratuitous remark by a state witness, unresponsive to the state solicitor’s question and revealing the result of the intoximeter test, was not an error serious enough to demand a new trial where the jury was given corrective instructions, there was other evidence of the defendant’s intoxication (including his own testimony that he had consumed up to a fifth of wine), and where the defendant failed, upon being given the opportunity, to produce any of the three jurors he alleged had informed him that their verdict had been influenced by the remark.

Accordingly, the denial of the motions for mistrial and new trial were proper.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., and Clark, J., concur.

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

Stolz, Judge.

In the defendant’s trial for driving under the influence of alcohol, where the judge had sustained the defendant’s motion in limine to suppress evidence pertaining to the results of an intoximeter test administered illegally under Code Ann. § 68A-902.1 (a) (3), (4) (Ga. L. 1974, pp. 633, 672) and Nelson v. State, 135 Ga. App. 212 (217 SE2d 450) (1975), a gratuitous remark by a state witness, unresponsive to the state solicitor’s question and revealing the result of the intoximeter test, was not an error serious enough to demand a new trial where the jury was given corrective instructions, there was other evidence of the defendant’s intoxication (including his own testimony that he had consumed up to a fifth of wine), and where the defendant failed, upon being given the opportunity, to produce any of the three jurors he alleged had informed him that their verdict had been influenced by the remark.

Accordingly, the denial of the motions for mistrial and new trial were proper.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., and Clark, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

229 S.E.2d 110, 139 Ga. App. 630, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 1919, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morris-v-state-gactapp-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack