Edwards v. State, 30299
| Decision Date | 24 November 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 30299,30299 |
| Citation | 235 Ga. 603,221 S.E.2d 28 |
| Parties | Catherine EDWARDS v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Glenn Zell, Atlanta, for appellant.
Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., Carole E. Wall, Asst. Dist. Atty., Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., John W. Dunsmore, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Atlanta, for appellee.
Appellant, Catherine Edwards, appeals from her conviction of murder and life sentence.
1. At trial a witness for the state testified that he witnessed the shooting, that appellant and her husband were quarrelling while standing in the parking lot of a liquor store and that as her husband turned and walked away, she shot him four times with a .38 revolver. Appellant admitted killing her husband, but claimed that she did so in self-defense. However, the evidence is sufficient to support the jury's verdict of murder, and appellant's motion for new trial on general grounds was properly overruled.
2. Appellant complains that the trial court erred by instructing the jury on both the law of confessions and incriminating statements, and that her statement was actually an incriminating statement, making the instruction on confession prejudicial error.
The state introduced into evidence a statement made to the police by appellant on the night of her arrest. The appellant also testified at her trial. She related domestic quarrels over money and her husband's girlfriend and as to the occasion on which she shot him stated, 'I turned around and faced him, and I was scared he was going to jump on me and I started shooting, I didn't know whether he had his gun or not.'
Prior to the charge of the court a colloquy between court and counsel ensued in which the court stated: Defense counsel then stated: 'I think, if your honor please, you should charge that.' The court included in its charge both the law on confessions and incriminating statements.
Under the foregoing circumstances the appellant cannot complain of the charge as given. Both court and defense counsel agreed that the charge on both should be given and defense counsel's statement to the court was tantamount to a request to so charge. Induced error is impermissible. Patterson v. State, 233 Ga. 724(7), 213 S.E.2d 612 (1975); Jackson v. State, 234 Ga. 549, 553, 216 S.E.2d 834 (1975); Tamplin v. State, 235 Ga. 20, 25, 218 S.E.2d 779 (1975). This case differs from the facts in Sims v. State, 234 Ga. 177, 214 S.E.2d 902 (1975) and Thomas v. State, 234 Ga. 615, 216 S.E.2d 859 (1975) in which the defense counsel merely stated to the court that he had no objections to the charge as given.
3. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in failing to charge the jury on voluntary manslaughter, although not requested to do so. In the same colloquy referred to above the court notified counsel for appellant that he was going to charge on murder and justifiable homicide, to which counsel replied: 'Yes, your honor, I think you should charge it's either murder or justifiablehomicide . . . I don't see it's anything else.' We find no...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Potts v. State
...erroneous or not, appellant cannot obtain a reversal for errors which he himself has committed or induced. See, Edwards v. State, 235 Ga. 603, 221 S.E.2d 28 (1975); Patterson v. State, 233 Ga. 724, 727, 213 S.E.2d 612 (1975); Joyner v. State, 208 Ga. 435(2), 67 S.E.2d 221 (1951); Quattlebau......
-
Legare v. State, 34444
...acquittal, and obtain a new trial when that tactic fails.' " Hill v. State, 237 Ga. 523, 228 S.E.2d 898, 900 (1976); Edwards v. State, 235 Ga. 603, 604, 221 S.E.2d 28 (1975). Enumeration 16 is without 16. In Enumeration 17 the appellant alleges: "The court erred in sustaining the state's ob......
-
Smith v. State
...was going to shoot the debtor. Several obstacles waylay this claim. For one, "[i]nduced error is impermissible." Edwards v. State, 235 Ga. 603, 604(2), 221 S.E.2d 28 (1975); Farmer v. State, 180 Ga.App. 720, 722(5), 350 S.E.2d 583 (1986). For another, "[a]ppellate courts review enumerations......
-
Simmons v. State
...3, § P (2nd ed. 1991)), which was given by the court, he cannot now complain that the charge was given in error. Edwards v. State, 235 Ga. 603, 604, 221 S.E.2d 28 (1975). (b) Simmons maintains that the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on reckless conduct as a lesser includ......