Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Tukes v. State

Tukes v. State

189 S.E.2d 135, 125 Ga. App. 831, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 1487
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 17, 1972
Docket47003
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 189 S.E.2d 135 (Tukes 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
Tukes v. State, 189 S.E.2d 135, 125 Ga. App. 831, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 1487 (Ga. Ct. App. 1972).

Opinion

Jordan, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was indicted for the offense of arson and convicted of criminal attempt to commit arson. Error is assigned on the overruling of her motion for new trial on the general grounds only. Held:

We affirm. The record discloses an overwhelming array of evidence to support the verdict of guilty. Her co-defendant testified that she furnished the money to buy the gas, that they went to the dwelling occupied by Willie Ray and others, and that "I throwed the gas and she throwed the match.” A city policeman testified that he went to the house in answer to a call, saw a blazing fire, and apprehended the defendant and her co-defendant as they ran from the scene. There was other corroborating and damaging evidence.

A person commits arson in the first degree when by means of fire or explosives he knowingly damages "any dwelling house of another without his consent. . .” Code Ann. § 26-1401. The record shows that one of the occupants of the house had deeded the property to the defendant. It is therefore contended that the defendant could not be guilty of arson or attempted arson since she was the legal owner of the premises. This contention is without merit. The offense is committed whether the dwelling house is occupied, unoccupied, or vacant and whether the premises are the property of the defendant or of another. Lawful occupancy by one in charge constitutes ownership as contemplated by the statute, and the question of legal title is not involved. Golding v. State, 30 Ga. App. 30 (2) *832 (116 SE 881). See also, Rice v. State, 16 Ga. App. 128 (3) (84 SE 609); Morgan v. State, 120 Ga. 499, 502 (48 SE 238); and Harrell v. State, 121 Ga. 607 (49 SE 703).

Submitted March 9, 1972 Decided March 17, 1972 Rehearing denied March 30, 1972. Casey Thigpen, for appellant. H. R. Thompson, District Attorney, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen and Clark, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Crawford v. Government Employees Insurance
771 F. Supp. 1230 (S.D. Georgia, 1991)
Frost v. State
407 S.E.2d 765 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1991)
Brown v. State
394 S.E.2d 378 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Rash v. State
356 S.E.2d 719 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1987)
In re M. E. H.
349 S.E.2d 814 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1986)
Hufstetler v. State
319 S.E.2d 869 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1984)
Lawson v. State
292 S.E.2d 421 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1982)
Allen v. State
258 S.E.2d 285 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1979)
State v. Hovers
251 S.E.2d 397 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
189 S.E.2d 135, 125 Ga. App. 831, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 1487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tukes-v-state-gactapp-1972.