Walker v. State, 20854
| Citation | 114 S.E.2d 431,216 Ga. 15 |
| Decision Date | 05 May 1960 |
| Docket Number | No. 20854,20854 |
| Parties | Cecil WALKER v. STATE. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Georgia |
James H. Phillips, Robert L. Vining, Jr., Dalton, for plaintiff in error.
R. F. Chance, Sol. Gen., Calhoun, Eugene Cook, Atty. Gen., Rubye G. Jackson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court.
Cecil Walker and Marvin Walker were jointly indicted in Whitfield County for the murder of Oscar Parks. Cecil Walker was convicted of the offense charged without a recommendation, and was sentenced to be electrocuted. The exception is to a judgment denying his amended motion for new trial. Held:
1. Since the evidence was amply sufficient to support the verdict, there is no merit in the general grounds of the motion for new trial. See Walker v. State, 215 Ga. 128, 109 S.E.2d 748, 927, which is a prior appearance of this case.
2. One of the special grounds of the motion alleges that a new trial should be granted movant because the bailiffs who were placed in charge of the jury for two nights during the trial did not keep the jurors together nor remain with them at all times, as they were required by law to do, which fact was unknown to movant or his counsel until after the rendition of the verdict against him. As proof of this allegation, such bailiffs by separate affidavits testified that they had charge of the jury for two nights during the trial of movant; that they took them to the Hotel Dalton, where rooms were procured for them; that from two to four jurors were placed in a room, but on separate floors of the hotel; that they (the bailiffs) secured a different room for themselves, where they slept during the night; and that they and the jurors, according to previous arrangement, assembled in the lobby of the hotel on the following mornings. The movant and his counsel by affidavits testified that they had no knowledge of such separation and supervision of the jury until after the case was concluded by verdict. As and for its only counter showing, the State introduced an affidavit from all of the jurors whereby each testified that half of the jurors occupied rooms on the second floor of Hotel Dalton and the other half had rooms on the fourth floor of the same hotel; that one court bailiff had charge of the jurors on the second floor and a different bailiff was placed in charge of those on the fourth floor. Each juror testified that nothing transpired in the hotel on either night they were quartered there which affected or influenced him in any way in reaching the verdict returned in the case; that the case was not discussed or considered by the jury during the periods they were quartered in the hotel; and that no one discussed or attempted to discuss the case with him or any other member of the jury at any time while they were so quartered. Their affidavit is completely silent as to whether or not they were constantly attended by a bailiff or bailiffs while so quartered. In these circumstances, and following the rulings in Blount v. State, 214 Ga. 433(4), 105 S.E.2d 304; and Allen v. State, 215 Ga. 455(1), 111 S.E.2d 70, it must be and is held that the jury, during the periods mentioned above, was not kept together and attended by a bailiff or bailiffs in the manner and way required by law, and such non-compliance with the law requires this court to order a new trial. In the Blount and Allen cases, supra, the State made a counter showing very similar to the one made in this case, but, as this court there held, such a showing does not satisfy the requirement that the jury be kept together and that the bailiff placed in charge of the jury remain with them and stay awake at all times while he has charge of them.
3. Over an objection, timely made by counsel for the accused, that they were prejudicial in nature, highly inflammatory, not illustrative of any issue involved in the case and with but little variation of detail, the court permitted the solicitor general to introduce in evidence several photographs of the deceased which were taken soon after his death. The court also allowed the solicitor-general to introduce in evidence two pistols over an objection that they had not been properly connected with the commission of the offense for which the accused was being tried. We see no error in this. The indictment alleges that this defendant and Marvin Walker killed the person named therein (Oscar Parks) by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Henderson v. State
...Ga. 851, 866, 45 S.E.2d 267; Bryan v. State, 206 Ga. 73, 74, 55 S.E.2d 574; Hill v. State, 211 Ga. 683(3), 88 S.E.2d 145; Walker v. State, 216 Ga. 15(3), 114 S.E.2d 431; Jackson v. State, 225 Ga. 39, 47, 165 S.E.2d 711; and, Johnson v. State, 226 Ga. 511, 512, 175 S.E.2d The State also offe......
-
Maltbie v. State
...bed); Allen v. State, 215 Ga. 455(1), 111 S.E.2d 70 (1959) (Bailiff was in a room with a juror, but went to sleep); Walker v. State, 216 Ga. 15(2), 114 S.E.2d 431 (1960) (Jurors were quartered on different floors of a hotel and bailiffs slept in different rooms); Atlanta Newspapers v. State......
-
Heard v. State
...Exhibit 24 was properly admitted into evidence and we find no error in allowing it to be sent out with the jury. See Walker v. State, 216 Ga. 15, 17(3), 114 S.E.2d 431. (b) State's Exhibit 30 was a photograph of the defendant taken at the time defendant was booked and processed at the Mille......
-
Ford v. Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co.
...Ga. 294, 260 S.E.2d 18 (1979) (presuming harm when parties denied statutory right to question jurors individually); Walker v. State, 216 Ga. 15, 16, 114 S.E.2d 431 (1960) (ordering new trial based on bailiffs' failure to supervise jury); Poultryland, Inc. v. Anderson, 200 Ga. 549, 562, 37 S......