Wyatt v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Wyatt v. State

173 S.E. 926, 48 Ga. App. 849, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 225

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 29, 1934

Docket23841

StatusPublished

This text of 173 S.E. 926 (Wyatt 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

Wyatt v. State, 173 S.E. 926, 48 Ga. App. 849, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 225 (Ga. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Guerry, J.

The defendant, according to the evidence introduced by the State, shot Rich Gleaton in the back without warning, inflicting severe wounds. The defendant in his statement admitted the shooting, but claimed that he shot because he thought Gleaton was going to shoot him. The evidence objected to and made the subject of special assignments of error was evidence introduced by the State to show motive of the defendant; and, conceding, but not deciding, that it was objectionable at the time it was offered, it became relevant by reason of other evidence and the statement of the defendant. Other testimony to the same effect was brought out without objection, and some of it was developed by defendant’s counsel. The evidence amply supports the verdict and the trial judge did not err in overruling the defendant’s motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

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

Guerry, J.

The defendant, according to the evidence introduced by the State, shot Rich Gleaton in the back without warning, inflicting severe wounds. The defendant in his statement admitted the shooting, but claimed that he shot because he thought Gleaton was going to shoot him. The evidence objected to and made the subject of special assignments of error was evidence introduced by the State to show motive of the defendant; and, conceding, but not deciding, that it was objectionable at the time it was offered, it became relevant by reason of other evidence and the statement of the defendant. Other testimony to the same effect was brought out without objection, and some of it was developed by defendant’s counsel. The evidence amply supports the verdict and the trial judge did not err in overruling the defendant’s motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

173 S.E. 926, 48 Ga. App. 849, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 225, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wyatt-v-state-gactapp-1934.