Anglin v. State, 58474

• Decision Date: 06 October 1979
• Docket Number: No. 58474,58474
• Citation: 260 S.E.2d 563,151 Ga.App. 570
• Parties: ANGLIN v. The STATE.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Page 563

260 S.E.2d 563

151 Ga.App. 570

ANGLIN v. The STATE.

No. 58474.

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Submitted Sept. 5, 1979.

Decided Oct. 1, 1979.

Certiorari Denied Oct. 6, 1979.

Jane Kent Plaginos, Cumming, for appellant.

Frank C. Mills, III, Dist. Atty., William R. Pardue, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.

DEEN, Chief Judge.

This appeal is brought from a conviction for violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act (possession of more than one ounce of marijuana).

Appellant contends that the trial court erred in failing to grant his motion for a mistrial after the sheriff testified: "Well, we had an undercover marijuana buy from the defendant at that residence. I had known him to live there before. As a matter of fact I had prior information on him selling marijuana prior to that." The motion was denied and the court allowed the district attorney to present a witness who could substantiate a sale of marijuana on the same day that the search was conducted pursuant to a warrant. Appellant argues that there was no evidence that he had prior convictions or even any arrests for any offense and that the testimony of the sheriff and the other witness placed his character in issue in that it showed evidence of a crime which was wholly independent from that for which he was on trial.

" '(O)n a prosecution for a particular crime, evidence which in any manner shows, or tends to show, that the accused has committed another crime wholly independent from that for which he is on trial, Even though it be a crime of the same sort, is irrelevant and inadmissible.' (Cit.)" Bacon v. State, 209 Ga. 261, 262, 71 S.E.2d 615, 617 (1952). "Before evidence of independent crimes is admissible two conditions must be satisfied. First, there must be evidence that the defendant was in fact the perpetrator of the independent crime. Second, there must be sufficient similarity or connection between the independent crime and the offense charged, that proof of the former tends to prove the latter." French v. State, 237 Ga. 620, 621, 229 S.E.2d 410, 411 (1976). Evidence which tends to show that an accused has committed another crime wholly independent from that for which he is on trial, even though it be a crime of the same sort, is irrelevant and inadmissible. Rosborough v. State, 209 Ga. 362, 72 S.E.2d 717 (1952). Evidence of an independent crime is inadmissible unless its relevance to the issue at trial outweighs its prejudicial impact. Payne v. State, 233 Ga. 294, ...