Wilkerson v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Wilkerson v. State

47 S.E.2d 816, 77 Ga. App. 55, 1948 Ga. App. LEXIS 491

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 6, 1948

Docket32002.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 47 S.E.2d 816 (Wilkerson 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

Wilkerson v. State, 47 S.E.2d 816, 77 Ga. App. 55, 1948 Ga. App. LEXIS 491 (Ga. Ct. App. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

Townsend, J.

Touching alibi, the rale in this State consists of two branches, viz: “The first is, that to overcome proof of guilt strong enough to exclude all reasonable doubt, the onus is on the accused to verify his alleged alibi, not beyond reasonable doubt, but to the reasonable satisfaction of the jury. The second is that, nevertheless, any evidence whatever of alibi is to be considered on the general case with the rest of the testimony, and if a reasonable doubt of guilt be raised by the evidence as a whole, the doubt must be given in favor of innocence.” Harrison v. State, 83 Ga. 129 (3) (9 S. E. 542).

2. The failure of the court to charge the jury upon the second branch of the rule of alibi, on the trial of a case where a charge on the defense of alibi is required, is such error as requires the grant of a new trial. See Ledford v. State, 75 Ga. 856; Harrison v. State, 83 Ga. 129 (9 S. E. 542); Callahan v. State, 14 Ga. App. 442 (81 S. E. 380); Raysor v. State, 132 Ga. 237 (63 S. E. 786); Moody v. State, 17 Ga. App. 121 (86 S. E. 285).

3. Since the case is reversed on a special assignment of error contained in the amended motion for a new trial, the same is not considered on the general grounds.

Judgment reversed.

MacIntyre, P.J., and Gardner, J., concur. *56 C. L. Cowart, for plaintiff in error. B. L. Dawson, Solicitor-General, contra.

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

Townsend, J.

Touching alibi, the rale in this State consists of two branches, viz: “The first is, that to overcome proof of guilt strong enough to exclude all reasonable doubt, the onus is on the accused to verify his alleged alibi, not beyond reasonable doubt, but to the reasonable satisfaction of the jury. The second is that, nevertheless, any evidence whatever of alibi is to be considered on the general case with the rest of the testimony, and if a reasonable doubt of guilt be raised by the evidence as a whole, the doubt must be given in favor of innocence.” Harrison v. State, 83 Ga. 129 (3) (9 S. E. 542).

2. The failure of the court to charge the jury upon the second branch of the rule of alibi, on the trial of a case where a charge on the defense of alibi is required, is such error as requires the grant of a new trial. See Ledford v. State, 75 Ga. 856; Harrison v. State, 83 Ga. 129 (9 S. E. 542); Callahan v. State, 14 Ga. App. 442 (81 S. E. 380); Raysor v. State, 132 Ga. 237 (63 S. E. 786); Moody v. State, 17 Ga. App. 121 (86 S. E. 285).

3. Since the case is reversed on a special assignment of error contained in the amended motion for a new trial, the same is not considered on the general grounds.

Judgment reversed.

MacIntyre, P.J., and Gardner, J., concur. *56 C. L. Cowart, for plaintiff in error. B. L. Dawson, Solicitor-General, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 S.E.2d 816, 77 Ga. App. 55, 1948 Ga. App. LEXIS 491, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilkerson-v-state-gactapp-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack