Chambers v. State, 31805.

• Decision Date: 05 December 1947
• Docket Number: No. 31805.,31805.
• Citation: 45 S.E.2d 724
• Parties: CHAMBERS. v. STATE.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

45 S.E.2d 724

CHAMBERS.

v.STATE.

No. 31805.

Court of Appeals of Georgia,

Division No. 2.

Dec. 5, 1947.

Error from City Court of Polk County; John L. Tyson, Judge.

Fred Chambers was convicted of possessing whisky on which the state tax and license fee had not been paid, and he brings error.

Reversed.

Cecil D. Franklin, of Rockmart, for plaintiff in error.

J. Brantley Edwards, Sol., of Cedar-town, for defendant in error.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court

GARDNER, Judge.

The defendant was convicted in the City Court of Polk County for possessing whiskey "upon which the State tax and license fee due the State of Georgia had not been paid." He filed his amended motion for a new trial, which was overruled. On this judgment he assigns error here.

During the progress of the trial the State introduced an accusation which alleged that upon the 27th day of November, 1946, the defendant was accused of having whiskey upon which the State tax and license fee had not been paid, and that on the 3d day of January, 1947, the defendant entered a plea of guilty to such accusation. The accusation in the instant case charges him with the illegal possession of whiskey on the 27th day of February, 1947. When this former accusation and plea of guilty was offered by the State, the defendant objected to the introduction of the same. This objection was over-ruled by the court. It is contended in the amended motion for a new trial, setting forth these facts, that the introduction of the former accusation and plea was prejudicial to the defendant and requires a reversal. The assignment of error upon the introduction of this testimony is as follows:

"1. Because said document injected into the case a matter not of issue under the said accusation on which the defendant was being tried and that said document did, upon admission, put before the jury a previous plea of guilty by the movant of such character that the jury could reasonably assume and did likely assume the defendant's guilt because of the former conviction when, as a matter of fact, the documentary evidence was irrelevant and immaterial as an issue in the case at bar.

"2. Because the documentary evidence was of such character and nature as to put the defendant's character in issue, when as a matter of fact, the defendant had not placed his own character at issue in the case, and for this reason the jury could conclude, and did likely draw a conclusion from said document that if the defendant had admitted guilt of similar charges at some time in the past his character was of such that he did likely again commit the same or similar offense.

"3. Because the documentary evidence was of such nature that the jury could conclude and would likely draw a conclusion that if the defendant had, at any time in the past, engaged in illicit liquor operations he would likely continue to possess non-tax-paid liquor as charged in the accusation on which the defendant was being tried, although the accusation introduced contained a plea of guilt entered by the defendant approximately six months next prior to the trial of the case at bar; and that his character and reputation injected in the case because of the introduction and admission of said accusation and plea was such that the jury could conclude and did likely draw a conclusion that the defendant continued to engage in illicit liquor operations."

We feel constrained to hold that the admission of this testimony was erroneous and harmful.

This Court held in Palmer v. State, Ga.App., 44 S.E.2d 567, 568, same being a case where some five years had elapsed between...