Baldwin v. State

• Decision Date: 09 July 1912
• Citation: 75 S.E. 324,138 Ga. 340
• Parties: BALDWIN . v. STATE.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

75 S.E. 324

(138 Ga. 340)

BALDWIN .

v.STATE.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

July 9, 1912.

(Syllabus by the, Court.)

1. Criminal Law (§ 918^*)—Trial—Rendition of Verdict—Absence of Counsel.

It is not cause for a new trial that the verdict was returned into court and received during the voluntary absence of the defendant's counsel, under the circumstances narrated in the opinion.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Criminal Law. Cent. Dig. §§ 2163-2192, 2195, 2196, 2219-2224; Dec. Dig. § 918.*]

2. Witnesses (§ 274*)—Oross-Examination— Character of Defendant.

Where a witness called by the defendant testified to his good character from general reputation, it is allowable, on cross-examination, for the witness to testify to his having heard of specific instances of conduct tending to disprove the witness' estimate of the defendant's character.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Witnesses, Cent. Dig. §§ 965, 966; Dec. Dig. § 274.*]

3. Criminal Law (§ 922*)—Trial—Instructions—Necessity for Requests.

In the absence of a written request, ordinarily the failure of the court, in his charge, toapply a rule of evidence to the testimony of a particular witness is not cause for a new trial.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2210-2218; Dec. Dig. § 922.^2-*]

Error from Superior Court, Stewart County; Z. A. Littlejohn, Judge.

Jack Baldwin was convicted of murder, and he brings error. Affirmed.

G. Y. Harrell, of Lumpkin, for plaintiff in error.

J. R. Williams, Sol. Gen., of Americus, and T. S. Felder, Atty. Gen., for the State.

EVANS, P. J. The plaintiff in error, Jack Baldwin, was convicted of the murder of Alice Scott. From the evidence and the defendant's statement, the jury were authorized to find: That the accused and the deceased had been living in a state of concubinage; that, having been informed that the deceased intended to marry another man, the accused went to a house where the deceased and this man were visiting, called the deceased to him, and, with a declaration that he intended to kill her, stabbed her 11 times, with the result that she died in 10 minutes from the wounds. The accused introduced a witness that he was in a drunken condition shortly before the homicide; and in his statement the accused admitted that he went to the house where the homicide occurred on the invitation of the deceased, but disclaimed knowing anything about inflicting the mortal wounds.

1. In his motion for new trial, the accused complains that the court received the verdict in the absence of his counsel. The trial judge certifies that during the term counsel for the accused had absented himself from the courtroom in other cases in which he was sole counsel, after the case had been submitted to the jury, resulting in delay in the effort to call counsel into the courtroom, and he was twice admonished by the court that if he voluntarily absented himself again the court would receive verdicts in his cases during his absence. When the jury in the present case came into the courtroom to render their verdict, the defendant was present; but counsel for defendant, without permission of the court, had absented himself from the courtroom. The judge directed an officer to look for counsel in the lawyers' consulting room. He was not there. Counsel was then called from the courtroom window, but not at the instance of the judge. The judge waited a little while for counsel to appear, and then received the verdict. The jurors were standing at the bar rail, on the outside of the space reserved for the bar, when the verdict was received. Counsel entered just as the jurors were taking their seats, not in the jury box, but just out of the bar railing. The judge could not say that the jurors did not sit down where persons...