Roberts v. State

174 S.E. 358, 49 Ga. App. 139, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 301
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided April 20, 1934·No. 23864·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

“In a criminal case, where the accused has exercised his statutory right to make a statement and the statement is contradictory of the testimony of the State’s witness [or witnesses], it is the duty of the trial judge, even in the absence of a written request, to instruct the jury that they have the right to believe the statement in preference to the sworn testimony.’’ (Italics ours.) Rivers v. State, 8 Ga. App. 694 (70 S. E. 47), and cit. Under the foregoing ruling and the facts of the instant case, the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial must be and is Reversed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

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

Roberts v. State, 174 S.E. 358, 49 Ga. App. 139, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 301 (Ga. Ct. App. 1934).

174 S.E. 358 (Roberts v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Godfrey v. State
18 S.E.2d 499 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1942)
Knopp v. State
3 S.E.2d 140 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1939)