Climer v. State
| Decision Date | 16 February 1949 |
| Docket Number | 16522. |
| Parties | CLIMER v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. There was ample evidence to authorize the verdict of guilty and the general grounds of the motion for new trial are without merit.
2. Evidence as to venue, though slight, is sufficient where there is no conflicting evidence.
Transferred from the Court of Appeals 50 S.E.2d 633.
Travis Climer was convicted of rape. His motion for new trial, on the general grounds and one special ground added by amendment, was overruled; and to this judgment he excepted.
The State's evidence tended to show the following facts: The victim was a girl some fourteen or fifteen years of age. On May 26, 1947, she and a girl companion had attended graduating exercises at a schoolhouse in Shannon, Georgia and were walking along the streets on their way home when a car, containing three boys and a girl, stopped beside them and they became engaged in a conversation with the occupants of the car. The victim did not know the occupants of the car, but she and her companion were persuaded to get into the car and drive around. Two couples sat in the rear seat of the car and the victim sat in the front seat with the accused, who was driving. After they had visited two or three places, during which time the occupants, except the victim and her girl companion, drank some beer and whisky, they finally drove to a place called South Rome Barbecue at Rome, Georgia, where one couple left the car. The other occupants then left the South Rome Barbecue with the victim and the accused still sitting on the front seat of the car and the victim's girl companion and a boy named Paddy McCollum sitting on the rear seat. Thereafter, according to the testimony of the victim, the following occurred: She stated that, after they had returned to the car, the accused searched for a pocketbook the victim had lost; that they re-entered the car, drove back to the South Rome Barbecue, and picked up the girl who had been left there, and then proceeded to a point near the victim's home where at her request, the car was stopped and she and her girl companion got out of the car.
The victim's girl companion gave the following account of what occurred after leaving the South Rome Barbecue:
An aunt of the victim testified:
The victim's mother testified that she saw the victim at about one-thirty in the morning when she returned to her home after she had been out looking for her daughter; that The witness then testified as to stains on articles of clothing the victim was wearing. This clothing was introduced in evidence.
M. G Hicks and C. T. Culbert, both of Rome, for plaintiff in error.
E. J Clower, Sol. Gen., of Rome, Eugene Cook, Atty. Gen., and J. R. Parham, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hance v. State
...within the county and was not part of the Federal military reservation. No conflicting evidence was introduced. Climer v. State, 204 Ga. 776, 51 S.E.2d 802 (1949). This evidence was sufficient to establish venue in Muscogee County. Wimbish v. State, 70 Ga. 718(3) (1883); Ellard v. State, 23......
-
Whitfield v. State
...not proved is also without merit. "Evidence of venue, though slight, is sufficient in the absence of conflicting evidence. Climer v. State, 204 Ga. 776, 51 S.E.2d 802. Venue may be proved by circumstantial as well as direct evidence." Loftin v. State, 230 Ga. 92, 93, 195 S.E.2d 402 (1973). ......
-
Carrigan v. State
...located in two counties. Where there is no conflict in the evidence, only slight evidence is necessary to prove venue. Climer v. State, 204 Ga. 776(2), 51 S.E.2d 802. Evidence that a burglary took place in a smokehouse contiguous to the house of the prosecutor, and that the prosecutor's hom......
-
Wells alias Wilson v. State, 18443
...Johnson v. State, 62 Ga. 299(1); Porter v. State, 76 Ga. 658(2), 660; Womble v. State, 107 Ga. 666(3), 33 S.E. 630; Climer v. State, 204 Ga. 776(2), 51 S.E.2d 802; Hubbard v. State, 208 Ga. 472, 474, 67 S.E.2d 562. Accordingly, the 2nd special ground of the motion is without 3. The evidence......