Ware v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Ware v. State

239 S.E.2d 552, 143 Ga. App. 663, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 2453

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 26, 1977

Docket54676

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 239 S.E.2d 552 (Ware 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

Ware v. State, 239 S.E.2d 552, 143 Ga. App. 663, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 2453 (Ga. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Deen, Presiding Judge.

Where the defendants are seen to enter a parked, locked car the window of which has been broken and shortly thereafter emerge with items of property from the vehicle in their arms, and the owner who is immediately called to the scene reports that a radio and two coats are missing therefrom, the evidence is sufficient as against the general grounds of a motion for new trial to sustain the conviction for theft by taking. "In criminal cases the corpus delicti, the identity of the stolen property, and the accused’s connection with the commission of the crime, may all be established by circumstantial evidence where such evidence is sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis save that of the guilt of the accused.” Worley v. State, 91 Ga. App. 663 (1) (86 SE2d 702). Recovery of the stolen property is not essential to proof of the corpus delicti. Mora v. United States, 190 F2d 749.

Judgment affirmed.

Webb and Birdsong, JJ., concur.

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

Deen, Presiding Judge.

Where the defendants are seen to enter a parked, locked car the window of which has been broken and shortly thereafter emerge with items of property from the vehicle in their arms, and the owner who is immediately called to the scene reports that a radio and two coats are missing therefrom, the evidence is sufficient as against the general grounds of a motion for new trial to sustain the conviction for theft by taking. "In criminal cases the corpus delicti, the identity of the stolen property, and the accused’s connection with the commission of the crime, may all be established by circumstantial evidence where such evidence is sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis save that of the guilt of the accused.” Worley v. State, 91 Ga. App. 663 (1) (86 SE2d 702). Recovery of the stolen property is not essential to proof of the corpus delicti. Mora v. United States, 190 F2d 749.

Judgment affirmed.

Webb and Birdsong, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

239 S.E.2d 552, 143 Ga. App. 663, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 2453, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ware-v-state-gactapp-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack