Shells v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Shells v. State

309 S.E.2d 664, 168 Ga. App. 442, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2808

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 17, 1983

Docket66776

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 309 S.E.2d 664 (Shells 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

Shells v. State, 309 S.E.2d 664, 168 Ga. App. 442, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2808 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

Shulman, Chief Judge.

This appeal is from appellant’s conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol, leaving the scene of an accident, and failing to have liability insurance.

Appellant alleges that the prosecuting attorney, during closing argument, referred to the defendant’s failure to testify. However, the transcript of the trial shows that appellant’s counsel chose not to have the arguments of counsel recorded until after the allegedly prejudicial remark. “This court cannot consider asserted errors which are not supported by the record. [Cits.] There being no transcript of what the remarks were, we cannot consider this enumerated error.” Mahar v. State, 137 Ga. App. 116, 117 (223 SE2d 204).

Defense counsel also objected to subsequent remarks of the prosecuting attorney concerning appellant’s failure to produce witnesses to rebut the state’s evidence. Those “remarks were permissible comments on the defense’s failure to adduce evidence in rebuttal to the state’s evidence. [Cits.]” Id.

Judgment affirmed.

McMurray, P. J., and Birdsong, J., concur.

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

Shulman, Chief Judge.

This appeal is from appellant’s conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol, leaving the scene of an accident, and failing to have liability insurance.

Appellant alleges that the prosecuting attorney, during closing argument, referred to the defendant’s failure to testify. However, the transcript of the trial shows that appellant’s counsel chose not to have the arguments of counsel recorded until after the allegedly prejudicial remark. “This court cannot consider asserted errors which are not supported by the record. [Cits.] There being no transcript of what the remarks were, we cannot consider this enumerated error.” Mahar v. State, 137 Ga. App. 116, 117 (223 SE2d 204).

Defense counsel also objected to subsequent remarks of the prosecuting attorney concerning appellant’s failure to produce witnesses to rebut the state’s evidence. Those “remarks were permissible comments on the defense’s failure to adduce evidence in rebuttal to the state’s evidence. [Cits.]” Id.

Judgment affirmed.

McMurray, P. J., and Birdsong, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

309 S.E.2d 664, 168 Ga. App. 442, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2808, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shells-v-state-gactapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack