Rayfield v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Rayfield v. State

72 S.E. 515, 10 Ga. App. 48, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 642

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 7, 1911

Docket3530

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 72 S.E. 515 (Rayfield 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

Rayfield v. State, 72 S.E. 515, 10 Ga. App. 48, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 642 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Russell, J.

Where the undisputed evidence shows that the defendant was in possession of the stolen goods on the very night of the burglary, it is not prejudicial error requiring a new trial that the judge, in charging the jury as to the presumption raised from such possession, left out the word “recent.” The error in the charge was immaterial, and harmless as to the defendant.

2. The testimony of the accomplice was fully corroborated, and the verdict of guilty authorized. Judgment affirmed.

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

Russell, J.

Where the undisputed evidence shows that the defendant was in possession of the stolen goods on the very night of the burglary, it is not prejudicial error requiring a new trial that the judge, in charging the jury as to the presumption raised from such possession, left out the word “recent.” The error in the charge was immaterial, and harmless as to the defendant.

2. The testimony of the accomplice was fully corroborated, and the verdict of guilty authorized. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 S.E. 515, 10 Ga. App. 48, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 642, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rayfield-v-state-gactapp-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack