Anthony v. State, 33804

• Decision Date: 05 December 1951
• Docket Number: No. 2,No. 33804,33804,2
• Citation: 68 S.E.2d 150,85 Ga.App. 119
• Parties: ANTHONY v. STATE
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Page 150

68 S.E.2d 150

85 Ga.App. 119

ANTHONY v. STATE.

No. 33804.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No. 2.

Dec. 5, 1951.

Syllabus by the Court.

To warrant a conviction on the sole evidence that fingerprints corresponding to those of the accused were found at the place where the crime was committed, the evidence must be sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that the fingerprints were impressed at the time the crime was committed.

Weldon Anthony was indicted, tried and convicted in the Superior Court of Spalding County for the offense of burglary. The corpus delicti was proved by a witness for the State who testified that his place of business was broken into between 10:00 p. m. April 23rd and 9:00 a. m. April 24, 1951, the hasp torn off the door, the bottom sash and glass of a kitchen window broken out, and several articles of merchandise missing of a value of approximately $73, plus money in the amount of between $15 and $28 located in an eight by twelve inch metal container in a pinball machine, and also in the music box. A witness qualifying as an expert introduced in evidence two fingerprints, one lifted from the money box of the pinball machine and the other from the money box of the music machine. As to the first, there was testimony identifying it as being a print of the middle finger of the left hand and as being identical with a fingerprint of the third finger of the left hand of Weldon Anthony as shown by a card in the police files of the City of Griffin made during a previous investigation. One witness testified that he knew that the Weldon Anthony on trial had formerly lived in Griffin and had moved to Atlanta, but no witness could identify him as the same Weldon Anthony who had been previously brought in for investigation and fingerprinted by the police department. Objection to the documentary evidence concerning fingerprints was made on the ground that it had not been proved that the Weldon Anthony on trial was the same person who had been previously fingerprinted, which objection was overruled. The defendant in his statement contended that he had not been in Griffin on the night in question but had been at home playing a card game, which statement was corroborated by the testimony of three witnesses, including the defendant's sister-in-law, who lived in the same house.

Upon conviction the defendant filed a motion for a new trial on the general grounds only, which motion was overruled, and this judgment is assigned as error.

Leward Hightower, Guy R. Dunn, Griffin, for plaintiff in error.

John J. Flynt, Jr., Sol. Gen., Griffin, for defendant in error.

TOWNSEND, Judge (after stating the foregoing facts).

Since error is not assigned on the admission into evidence of the fingerprint reproductions it will not be considered here, although, on the subject of similarity of name being prima facie evidence of identity, see Vann v. State, 72 Ga.App. 301, 33 S.E.2d 742; Mills v. State, 71 Ga.App. 353(4), 30 S.E.2d 824.

As stated in Moon v. State, 22 Ariz. 418, 198 P. 288, 290, 16 A.L.R. 362, 'It seems to be well settled, both in England and in this country, that evidence of the correspondence of finger print impressions for the purpose of identification, when introduced by qualified finger print experts, is admissible in criminal cases; the weight and value of such testimony always being a question for the jury.' See also ...