Douglas v. State, 49637
Decision Date | 24 September 1974 |
Docket Number | No. 3,No. 49637,49637,3 |
Citation | 132 Ga.App. 694,209 S.E.2d 114 |
Parties | Bernard DOUGLAS v. The STATE |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Elsie H. Griner, Nashville, for appellant.
Dewey Hayes, Dist. Atty., Douglas, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
Defendant was indicted for murder and convicted of voluntary manslaughter. He appealed from the judgment of conviction and sentence to the Supreme Court, which transferred the appeal here.
Defendant stabbed George Bennett to death on September 24, 1973, and immediately surrendered to the police. He was transferred to the county jail and advised of his rights before the judge in the courtroom, and employed counsel of his own choice. He was indicted for murder on October 15, and the case was scheduled for trial at the jury term in October. However, defendant's counsel did not appear because of illness, and the case was continued and subsequently tried in March, which was the next jury term. After the state and defense had closed, defendant moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that he had not been given a commitment hearing.
During the colloquy which followed the district attorney stated that a commitment hearing had been offered to defendant before counsel was employed. However, counsel stated that defendant had told her he had not been offered a hearing; that she was aware that defendant had a right to the hearing; that she knew that she was entitled to demand one on his behalf; but that she had not done so because she did not consider that the burden was upon her to request a hearing. The trial court overruled the motion to dismiss the indictment, of which defendant complains in the first enumeration of error. Held:
1. 'Any defect or irregularity in the prior arrest or imprisonment of the petitioner, even if there were such, would in no wise affect the jurisdiction of the court trying him.' Johnson v. Plunkett, 214 Ga. 353, 355(5), 110 S.E.2d 745, 747. Holmes v. State, 224 Ga. 553, 556(2), 163 S.E.2d 803, 807. Henderson v. State, 225 Ga. 273, 274, 168 S.E.2d 160, 161. Shields v. State, 126 Ga.App. 544(1), 191 S.E.2d 448.
Since the purpose of the commitment hearing is to determine whether there is probable cause to hold the accused for trial (Code § 27-407), the subsequent indictment, trial, and conviction of the accused render the omission harmless.' Thrash v. Caldwell, 229 Ga. 585(1), 193 S.E.2d 605. Herring v. State, 125 Ga.App. 770(1), 189 S.E.2d 132.
Wynn v. Caldwell, 231 Ga. 763, 765(3), 204 S.E.2d 143. Accord: Allen v. Caldwell, 231 Ga. 442(1), 202 S.E.2d 35; Jones v. Caldwell, 230 Ga. 775(1), 199 S.E.2d 248; Brand v. Wofford, 230 Ga. 750, 751(2), 199 S.E.2d 231; Atkins v. Martin, 229 Ga. 815(2), 194 S.E.2d 463; Cline v. Smith, 229 Ga. 190, 191(1), 190 S.E.2d 51; Burston v. Caldwell, 228 Ga. 795, 797(3), 187 S.E.2d 900; Smith v. Brown, 228 Ga. 584, 585-586, 187 S.E.2d 142; Ballard v. Smith, 225 Ga. 416, 419(4), 169 S.E.2d 329; Furman v. State, 225 Ga. 253(5), 167 S.E.2d 628; Whisman v. State, 223 Ga. 124, 153 S.E.2d 548; Johnson v. State, 126 Ga.App. 757, 761, 191 S.E.2d 614; Heard v. State, 126 Ga.App. 62, 64(1), 189 S.E.2d 895; Dukes v. State, 109 Ga.App. 825, 826(1), 137 S.E.2d 532; Blake v. State, 109 Ga.App. 636, 681(2), 137 S.E.2d 49.
2. The trial court did not express an opinion as to the guilt of defendant by charging, 'In other words, you will determine at this time, and consider only the question, is the defendant guilty?'
Judgment affirmed.
After both the state and defendant had closed all evidence, defend...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Moore v. Kemp
...eliminating the need for a committal hearing and terminating Judge Whitmire's jurisdiction over the case. See Douglas v. State, 132 Ga.App. 694, 209 S.E.2d 114 (1974). All subsequent proceedings in petitioner's case were handled by Judge On February 24, 1977, petitioner's appointed counsel ......
-
Cargill v. State
...(184 SE2d 459).' Wynn v. Caldwell, 231 Ga. 763, 765 (204 SE2d 143) (1974). For a collection of similar holdings see Douglas v. State, 132 Ga.App. 694 (209 SE2d 114) (1974). The '... purpose of a commitment hearing is simply to determine whether there is probable cause to believe the accused......
-
Tischmak v. State
...repeatedly ruled that lack of a commitment hearing will not be construed as reversible error after indictment. See Douglas v. State, 132 Ga.App. 694, 209 S.E.2d 114 where our colleague, Judge Webb, has collected a lengthy list of controlling citations on this 4. The court erred in sentencin......
-
Davis v. State
...cannot be made as late as the close of the evidence. See the cases cited in Judge Evans' special concurrence to Douglas v. State, 132 Ga.App. 694, 209 S.E.2d 114. However, since under Chapman the reviewing court must be able to declare its belief that the error did not contribute to the con......