167 S.E.2d 628 (Ga. 1969), 25163, Furman v. State

Docket Nº:25163.
Citation:167 S.E.2d 628, 225 Ga. 253
Opinion Judge:DUCKWORTH, Chief Justice.
Party Name:William Henry FURMAN v. The STATE.
Attorney:[225 Ga. 255] B. Clarence Mayfield, Savannah, for appellant. Andrew J. Ryan, Jr., Dist. Atty., Robert E. Barker, Savannah, Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Marion O. Gordon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Larry H. Evans, Atlanta, for appellee.
Case Date:April 24, 1969
Court:Supreme Court of Georgia
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 628

167 S.E.2d 628 (Ga. 1969)

225 Ga. 253

William Henry FURMAN

v.

The STATE.

No. 25163.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

April 24, 1969

Casemaker Note: Portions of this opinion were specifically rejected by a later court in 229 Ga. 731.

Casemaker Note: Portions of this opinion were specifically rejected by a later court See CaseCheck

Casemaker Note: Portions of this opinion were specifically rejected by a later court in 194 S.E.2d 431

Casemaker Note: Portions of this opinion were specifically rejected by a later court in 194 S.E.2d 410

Casemaker Note: Portions of this opinion were specifically rejected by a higher court in 408 U.S. 238

Casemaker Note: Portions of this opinion were specifically rejected by a later court in 229 Ga. 731.

Casemaker Note: Portions of this opinion were specifically rejected by a later court See CaseCheck

Casemaker Note: Portions of this opinion were specifically rejected by a later court in 194 S.E.2d 431

Casemaker Note: Portions of this opinion were specifically rejected by a later court in 194 S.E.2d 410

[225 Ga. 255] B. Clarence Mayfield, Savannah, for appellant.

Andrew J. Ryan, Jr., Dist. Atty., Robert E. Barker, Savannah, Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Marion O. Gordon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Larry H. Evans, Atlanta, for appellee.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court

DUCKWORTH, Chief Justice.

This case involves the crime of murder by shooting, occurring during a burglary after the intruder had been discovered by the deceased who was then shot through a closed door. The accused was indicted, tried and convicted without a recommendation for mercy. A motion for new trial, as amended, was filed, heard and overruled, and the appeal is from the judgment, after conviction, and sentence with error enumerated on the denial of the motion for new trial, as amended. Held:

1. A juror having been excluded for cause because he stated that his opposition to the death penalty would affect his decision as to a defendant's guilt, his exclusion did not fall within the rule as laid down in Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S.

Page 629

510, 88 S.Ct. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776, and the court did not err in excluding him for cause. There is no merit in the amended motion complaining that the exclusion violated the rule in the Witherspoon case, supra.

2. The record showing a definitive...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP