Teasley v. State
This text of 32 S.E. 335 (Teasley 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.
Opinion
1. Under previous rulings of this court, it is not error on the part of the presiding judge after having properly charged the jury in reference to the prisoner’s statement, after, instructing the jury that they may believe that statement in whole or in part to the exclusion of the sworn testimony, to add, “remembering it is not'under oath and does not subject him to the penalty incident to a sworn witness;” Poppell v. State, 71 Ga. 276; Klug v. State, 77 Ga. 734.
2. An examination of the record does not disclose that the judge erred in charging the jury or in ruling on the admissibility of evidence, of which complaint is made in the motion for new trial; and as the verdict is amply supported by the evidence, the judgment is
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
32 S.E. 335, 105 Ga. 842, 1899 Ga. LEXIS 780, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/teasley-v-state-ga-1899.