Baker v. State
| Citation | 199 S.E.2d 252,230 Ga. 741 |
| Decision Date | 02 July 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 27959,27959 |
| Parties | Sandy Karl BAKER v. The STATE. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Georgia |
Glenn Zell, Atlanta, for appellant.
Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., Joseph J. Drolet, Morris H. Rosenberg, Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Courtney Wilder Stanton, Daniel I. MacIntyre, Asst. Attys. Gen., Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
Baker appeals his convictions and sentence by a judge, jury trial waived, on two counts of armed robbery, two counts of aggravated assault, and two misdemeanor pistol offenses, all based on the same incident on October 11, 1972.
As related by Dodd, an Atlanta policeman and the only witness for the State, he and Basewell, another policeman, met on an Atlanta street at the scene of reported pistol firing involving three persons. Baker and two companions, C and O, were there. Dodd, cautioning the three not to attempt to use a pistol, proceeded to search or 'frisk' O for the presence of a pistol. Baker drew a pistol from his coat, placed it against Basewell's head, and threatened to kill him unless Dodd threw his own pistol to the ground. 'They' then took the policemen's pistols and ran. About twenty yards away Baker turned and fired two or three times at the policemen. Basewell returned the fire with a pistol, the source of which is not clear. Dodd returned fire with a spare pistol which was in his police vehicle.
Baker was the sole witness in his own behalf. His version differs from Dodd's in some respects. He admitted putting the pistol to Basewell's head, explaining that 'he (apparently meaning Dodd) had no business arresting us,' and that he, Baker, acted to 'keep them from shooting at us.' C removed the pistols from the policemen's holsters. Baker then put down his pistol and ran, and Basewell shot at him. Baker denied firing at either officer, and denied any intent to commit robbery or assault. He did not know who fired at the policemen.
Three errors are asserted, the overruling of a motion to suppress, unauthorized findings of guilty based on the contention that the defendant had a right as a matter of law to resist an unlawful arrest and disarm the policemen, and the overruling of an amended motion for a new trial. Held:
1. It is clear from the transcript of the hearing of the motion to suppress that trial defense counsel sought to suppress in its entirety the testimony of the two policemen and nothing else. The testimony of eyewitnesses and victims of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jarrell v. State
...may or may not be tendered on the trial and a requirement that the court attempt to do so would be intolerable.' See also Baker v. State, 230 Ga. 741(1), 199 S.E.2d 252. This reasoning is particularly applicable to confessions which are subject to Jackson-Denno hearings at the trial. If a m......
-
Cauley v. State, s. 48422
...under Code Ann. § 27-313, which is the sole authority for such a motion, does not lie under these circumstances. Baker v. State, 230 Ga. 741, 742(1), 199 S.E.2d 252. See also the discussion in Reid v. State, 129 Ga.App. 660, 200 S.E.2d 456. However, the motion also seeks to suppress 'any ev......
-
Reid v. State, 48461
...alleged crimes is outside the scope of a motion to suppress as contemplated under the provisions of Code Ann. § 27-313.' Baker v. State, 230 Ga. 741(1), 199 S.E.2d 252. Testimony is simply not within the scope of the motion as authorized by the Must a reversal result from the admission of t......
-
Childers v. State
...239. See also Bass v. State, 117 Ga.App. 89, 159 S.E.2d 299; Cook v. State, 116 Ga.App. 304, 305, 157 S.E.2d 160; and Baker v. State, 230 Ga. 741, 742, 199 S.E.2d 252. 2. Defendant contends that the court erred in permitting the sheriff 'to testify over objection of defendant's counsel afte......