Schaefer v. State

18 S.E. 552, 93 Ga. 177
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedOctober 9, 1893
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 18 S.E. 552 (Schaefer 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
Schaefer v. State, 18 S.E. 552, 93 Ga. 177 (Ga. 1893).

Opinion

Judgment affirmed.

Indictment for murder. Before Judge Bartlett, Henry superior court. April term, 1893.

Schaefer and Bivins were indicted for the murder of Sloan. Schaefer was convicted, with a recommendation to life imprisonment. A new trial was refused, and he excepted. The evidence was voluminous and conflicting. Bivins gave testimony to the effect that he and Schaefer made a plot and went at night, together with one Harrison, to Sloan’s residence for' the purpose of burglary; that on arriving at the premises Bivins refused to go in and Schaefer went alone; 'that Bivins saw Schaefer endeavoring to enter through a window, and walked away 'from the house a little distance,' where he waited until in a few moments he heard 'tlie firing of a pistol and ran off. It appeared that Bivins had on previous occasions sworn falsely about the matter, if his testimony at this trial was true. Other evidence showed that the house was actually entered through the window, and that Sloan was shot while asleep, by the burglar who made his escape unseen. There was some testimony, of a contradictory nature; tendin'g to show admissions by Schaefer that he had done the killing, and numerous circumstances appeared to support this theory. The only ground for new trial, besides the general grounds, was based on newly'discovered'evidence, in brief, as follows: Bivins was tried and convicted,' and while a motion for a new trial in his behalf was pending, he told his counsel, in a consultation relating to a prosecution of this motion, that he knew Schaefer had nothing to do with the shooting, but that he saw Tomlinson do the shooting. After this consultation his counsel dismissed the motion. On the night before the killing Tomlinson was seen in the town where Sloan resided, and seemed to be rather shy. In the month before the murder he was heard to say that Sloan (calling him a vile name) was the cause of his serving out two terms in the chain-gang, and that [179]*179lie intended to kill Sloan. In support of this ground appeared also affidavits to the effect that certain tracks appearing to have been found leading from Sloan’s premises in the direction in which Schaefer probably went, might as well have been made by Tomlinson in going towards the house of some of his relatives.

G-. W. Bryan and W. T. Dicken, for plaintiff in error. J. M. Terrell, attorney-general, and M. 'W. Beck, solicitor-general, contra.'

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

Related

Spencer v. State
386 S.E.2d 705 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
Vaughn v. State
228 S.E.2d 541 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1976)
H. L. B. v. State
135 Ga. App. 474 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1975)
Gray v. State
217 S.E.2d 482 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1975)
Nix v. State
211 S.E.2d 26 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)
Williams v. State
69 S.E.2d 647 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1952)
Grimes v. State
51 S.E.2d 797 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1949)
Reddick v. State
42 S.E.2d 742 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1947)
Logue v. State
32 S.E.2d 397 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1944)
Evans v. State
145 S.E. 903 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1928)
Thomas v. State
88 S.E. 917 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1916)
West v. State
64 S.E. 130 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1909)
Jones v. State
60 S.E. 840 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1908)
Wimberly v. State
31 S.E. 162 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1898)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
18 S.E. 552, 93 Ga. 177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schaefer-v-state-ga-1893.