Turner v. State

77 S.E. 828, 139 Ga. 593, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 526
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMarch 11, 1913
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 77 S.E. 828 (Turner 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
Turner v. State, 77 S.E. 828, 139 Ga. 593, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 526 (Ga. 1913).

Opinion

Evans, P. J.

1. In the absence of a proper .written request, it is not cause for new trial that the court failed to instruct the jury upon the rule of law respecting the credibility of witnesses. Lewis v. State, 125 Ga. 48 (53 S. E. 816); Lewis v. State, 129 Ga. 731 (59 S. E. 782).

2. The court charged the jury on the subject of their duty to acquit the defendants, or such of them as to whom the evidence failed to show guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, as clearly and distinctly as was stated in the written request. Where the court has fairly and fully instructed the jury on a given subject, it is not error to deny requests to charge on that subject, varying from the charge only in the mode of expression, and not in substance. Perdue v. State, 126 Ga. 112 (54 S. E. 820).

3. It was not error to give the following charge: “I charge you in this connection that where a homicide is shown to have been committed, the law presumes that the homicide was malicious,’ and it devolves on the defendant to show justification or mitigation or excuse unless the evidence adduced against him shows such justification or mitigation or excuse, or unless the circumstances connected with the homicide, if a homicide is shown to have been committed, show justification or mitigation or excuse.” Mann v. State, 124 Ga. 760 (53 S. E. 324, 4 L. R. A. (N. S.) 934).

4. The evidence was sufficient to show concert of action with the actual slayer, who was jointly tried with the plaintiffs in error, and that the homicide was murder. The court did not abuse its discretion in refusing a new trial.

Judgment affirmed,.

Beeh, J., absent. The other Justices concur.

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

Related

Whitus v. State
149 S.E.2d 130 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1966)
Hilburn v. Hilburn
81 S.E.2d 1 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1954)
Patrick v. State
74 S.E.2d 848 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1953)
Clardy v. State
75 S.E.2d 208 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1953)
Ogletree v. State
73 S.E.2d 201 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1952)
Bivins v. State
38 S.E.2d 273 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1946)
Cady v. State
31 S.E.2d 38 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1944)
Kennedy v. State
11 S.E.2d 179 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1940)
Perry v. State
195 S.E. 175 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1938)
Benton v. State
194 S.E. 166 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1937)
Patterson v. State
184 S.E. 309 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1936)
Lively v. State
173 S.E. 836 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1934)
McRae v. State
136 S.E. 268 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1926)
Richardson v. State
82 S.E. 134 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1914)
White v. State
81 S.E. 440 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1914)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
77 S.E. 828, 139 Ga. 593, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 526, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/turner-v-state-ga-1913.