Chandler v. State, 54256
Decision Date | 22 September 1977 |
Docket Number | No. 2,No. 54256,54256,2 |
Citation | 143 Ga.App. 608,239 S.E.2d 158 |
Parties | Freddie M. CHANDLER v. The STATE |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Richard L. Powell, Augusta, for appellant.
Richard E. Allen, Dist. Atty., Gayle B. Hamrick, Asst. Dist. Atty., Augusta, for appellee.
The defendant appeals his conviction for violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act. Held :
1. Jones v. State, 135 Ga.App. 893, 896, 219 S.E.2d 585, 588. Accord: Scoggins v. State, 98 Ga.App. 360(2), 106 S.E.2d 39; Beasley v. State, 115 Ga.App. 827(1), 156 S.E.2d 128.
The first enumeration of error is not meritorious.
2. Barrow v. State, 235 Ga. 635, 641, 221 S.E.2d 416, 421. Where the trial judge gives corrective instructions and thereafter counsel fails to request further instruction or renew his motion for mistrial, an enumeration addressed to such ground is without merit. Clyatt v. State, 126 Ga.App. 779, 786, 192 S.E.2d 417.
Enumerations of error 2 and 3 show no basis for reversal.
3. A trial judge may not judicially note a prior conviction in his own court without compliance with Code Ann. § 27-2503(a) (Ga.L.1974, pp. 352, 357). Paschal v. State, 139 Ga.App. 842, 845(6), 229 S.E.2d 795. Nevertheless, in this case there is nothing to establish that the trial judge's recollection of a prior charge against the defendant which was dismissed resulted in an increased sentence. See Munsford v. State, 235 Ga. 38, 218 S.E.2d 792.
There is no merit in enumeration of error 5.
4. The evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict. Enumerations of error 6 and 7 are therefore without merit.
5. Any question as to the excessiveness of the sentence, which was within legal limits, should be addressed to the sentence review panel as provided in Code Ann. § 27-2511.1 ) ). Lee v. State, 139 Ga.App. 65, 66, 227 S.E.2d 878; Thomas v. State, 139 Ga. 364, 365, 228 S.E.2d 386; Mydell v. State, 238 Ga. 450(2), 233 S.E.2d 199. Enumeration of error 8 is without merit.
6. Since the indictment and the plea of not guilty entered thereon constitute the pleadings in a criminal case, it has always been the practice in this State to permit the jury to have, in their room, the indictment. Broughton v. State, 186 Ga. 588, 589(1), 199 S.E. 111; Salem v. State, 228 Ga. 186, 188(5), 184 S.E.2d 650.
However the Supreme Court has pointed out the advisability of masking or concealing extraneous or prejudicial matter contained in an indictment. Salem v. State, 228 Ga. 186, 184 S.E.2d 650, supra; Riggins v. Stynchcombe, 231 Ga. 589, 593, 203 S.E.2d 208; Bostick v. Ricketts, 236 Ga. 304, 305, 223 S.E.2d 686. Compare: Page v. State, 120 Ga.App. 709(1), 172 S.E.2d 207; Corbin v. State, 212 Ga. 231(2), 91 S.E.2d 764. Under the circumstances of this case, it was not error to permit a copy of the indictment to go out with the jury where the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Moss v. State
...discretion to give the jury a redacted indictment where the only thing deleted is the name of a co-indictee, see Chandler v. State, 143 Ga.App. 608, 609, 239 S.E.2d 158 (1977), and Appellant has failed to explain how that discretion was abused here. Finally, Appellant points to the State's ......
-
Martin v. State
...testimony might have created. In such circumstances, the overruling of the motion for mistrial was not even error. Chandler v. State, 143 Ga.App. 608, 239 S.E.2d 158 (1977). Furthermore, the attorney who made the challenged remark actually had no connection whatsoever with other allegations......
-
Jones v. State
...corrections of the prosecutor's statements were appropriate and consistent with defense counsel's objections. See Chandler v. State, 143 Ga.App. 608(2), 239 S.E.2d 158 (1977). No objection was made at trial to the prosecutor's statement which defendant now urges vouched for the credibility ......
-
Byrd v. State
...in their room the indictment in a criminal case. Salem v. State, 228 Ga. 186, 188(5), 184 S.E.2d 650 (1971); Chandler v. State, 143 Ga.App. 608, 610(6), 239 S.E.2d 158 (1977). The names of the grand jurors are a part of the indictment. Although the Supreme Court has pointed out in Salem the......