Roddenberry v. State

140 S.E. 386, 37 Ga. App. 359, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 678
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedNovember 16, 1927
Docket18335
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 140 S.E. 386 (Roddenberry 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
Roddenberry v. State, 140 S.E. 386, 37 Ga. App. 359, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 678 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

Only the 3d headnote needs elaboration. Under the law of this State, to convict of perjury requires two witnesses or one witness and corroborating circumstances. Penal Code (1910), § 1017. Basing his charge on the foregoing statute and the principles announced in the ease of Bell v. State, 5 Ga. App. 701, 703, 704 (63 S. E. 860), which case is supported by decisions from many States and numerous text writers, the presiding judge correctly charged the jury that “The corroborating evidence necessary to support the testimony of a witness must not be evidence that emanates from the mouth of the defendant himself, but evidence from another source which tends to show the perjury independently of the declaration of the defendant.” “ Contradictory sworn statements by the defendant are not alone sufficient to establish the crime of perjury.” “Where it is shown that the contradictory statements are made under oath, and there is nothing to show which of them is false, the defendant can not be convicted.” “The mere statements of the defendant who is alleged to have made the false oath that such oath was in fact untrue, are not entitled to any weight by the jury unless supported by other competent evidence to establish the falsity of the oath.” Applying the foregoing rules of law to the evidence in this case it is clear that the charge of perjury was not established by “two witnesses or by one witness and corroborating circumstances.” The proof that defendant had made contradictory statements is not alone sufficient to convict.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, G. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Related

In the Interest of C. H.
585 S.E.2d 921 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2003)
Dixon v. State
324 S.E.2d 780 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1984)
Hobbs v. State
107 S.E.2d 253 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
140 S.E. 386, 37 Ga. App. 359, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 678, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roddenberry-v-state-gactapp-1927.