Reese v. State

122 S.E. 195, 157 Ga. 766, 1924 Ga. LEXIS 242
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMarch 11, 1924
DocketNo. 3994
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 122 S.E. 195 (Reese 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.

Bluebook
Reese v. State, 122 S.E. 195, 157 Ga. 766, 1924 Ga. LEXIS 242 (Ga. 1924).

Opinion

Russell, C. J.

The plaintiff in error was jointly indicted with one Robert (or Murray) Taylor for the offense of murder. Taylor did the actual killing by shooting the deceased to death, and the guilt of the plaintiff in error depends upon whether he participated in the crime by aiding and abetting Taylor in the commission of the crime. Mere presence at the time and place that a crime is committed is, of course, wholly insufficient of itself to evidence participation in the criminal intent. In the present case the evidence of the participation of the plaintiff in error in the killing of To-bridge, the deceased, is in conflict. However, there are circum[767]*767stances (such as the fact that the plaintiff in error falsely stated his name, forced his way into the house, made no request for a match, searched for the deceased after having been told he was not at home, and disclosed his whereabouts to Taylor, who immediately shot the deceased to death) which authorized the jury to find that the plaintiff in error, even in the absence of evidence of a previous plot, aided and abetted the actual murderer in accomplishing his intent. The charge of the trial judge was notably clear and absolutely fair to the accused, and stressed most favorably to him the rule of law as to circumstantial evidence; and though there is no evidence of a previous conspiracy, and though the evidence is not as satisfactory as if there had been proof of a previous conspiracy, the judgment of the trial judge approving the verdict of the jury cannot be disturbed; for there was no error of law in the trial, nor indeed any complaint upon that ground.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Johnson v. State
538 S.E.2d 481 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2000)
Muhammad v. State
254 S.E.2d 356 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1979)
Geter v. State
173 S.E.2d 680 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1970)
Sweat v. State
168 S.E.2d 654 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1969)
Demonia v. State
22 S.E.2d 520 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1942)
Jones v. State
13 S.E.2d 91 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1941)
Spratley v. Commonwealth
152 S.E. 362 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1930)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
122 S.E. 195, 157 Ga. 766, 1924 Ga. LEXIS 242, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reese-v-state-ga-1924.