Brown v. State, 49433
| Decision Date | 20 June 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 49433,No. 2,49433,2 |
| Citation | 132 Ga.App. 200,207 S.E.2d 682 |
| Parties | Clarence M. BROWN, Jr. v. The STATE |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Nick G. Lambros, Atlanta, for appellant.
Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., Richard E. Hicks, Morris H. Rosenberg, Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
Appellant, together with defendants Flinchum, Peterson, George, Brannon, Fagala, Aiken and Schmalz, were jointly indicted for theft by taking in a check kiting operation as a result of which the First Georgia Bank lost in excess of $300,000.
Defendants Aiken, Flinchum and Brown were tried separately and in each case verdicts of guilty were returned. In Brown's appeal error is enumerated on the admission of testimony of co-conspirators Brannon and Peterson, the enumeration being based upon Code § 38-414 which prohibits the admission of a confession of a co-conspirator made after termination of the conspiracy as against any save himself. Error is also enumerated on the overruling of a motion for new trial on the general grounds. Held:
1. The general grounds are without merit. The evidence is ample to support a conviction.
2. The admission of a confession made by a co-conspirator after termination of the conspiracy is quite a different thing from the admission of sworn testimony by a co-conspirator and this has been recognized by the Supreme Court in Pippin v. State, 205 Ga. 316(12), 53 S.E.2d 482, where he is held to be a competent witness to testify as to any relevant matter concerning the charge, and that in this situation Code § 38-414 has no application.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Christmas v. State
...Oliver v. State, 159 Ga.App. 154, 282 S.E.2d 767 (1981); Boggus v. State, 136 Ga.App. 917, 222 S.E.2d 686 (1975); Brown v. State, 132 Ga.App. 200, 207 S.E.2d 682 (1974). In such an evidentiary posture the co-conspirator or accomplice has exactly the same status as any other competent witnes......
-
Dudley v. State, 56667
...been granted. See Gibbs v. State, 144 Ga. 166(1, 2), 86 S.E. 543; Brandon v. State, 169 Ga. 808(1, 2), 151 S.E. 493; Brown v. State, 132 Ga.App. 200(2), 207 S.E.2d 682; Crowder v. State, 237 Ga. 141, 153, 227 S.E.2d 230. The enumeration of error complaining of the failure of the court to st......
-
Mindock v. State
...rule does not apply where the joint offender is present and testifies as a witness subject to cross-examination, Brown v. State, 132 Ga.App. 200(2), 207 S.E.2d 682 (1974), that exception is inapplicable here. Under the rule set forth above, the testimony complained of by appellant is not re......
-
Oliver v. State, s. 62104
...of Code § 38-414 have no application where the joint offender or conspirator is sworn and testifies as a witness. Brown v. State, 132 Ga.App. 200(2), 207 S.E.2d 682; Phillips v. State, 142 Ga.App. 581(1), 236 S.E.2d 519; Pippin v. State, 205 Ga. 316(12), 53 S.E.2d 482; Hill v. State, 239 Ga......