Eiland v. State
| Decision Date | 26 November 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 1,No. 48760,48760,1 |
| Citation | 203 S.E.2d 619,130 Ga.App. 428 |
| Parties | Elvage EILAND v. The STATE |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
J. M. Salome, Robert S. Windholz, Atlanta, for appellant.
Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., Raoul Lerow, Morris H. Rosenberg, Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
The events of this case are simple. The defendant driver, with two other men in the car, was attempted to be stopped by two unmarked police cars manned by ununiformed detectives. As the defendant's car was proceeding in a southerly direction at about 25 to 35 miles per hour, one unmarked police car approached from the rear, and another approached with oncoming traffic in a northerly direction. As it came up to the defendant's car it swerved across the center line to its left hand side of the road and stopped in front of the defendant's car, which also pulled to a stop when so confronted. The driver of the oncoming police car pointed a pistol at the defendant. There is some conflict as to whether a shot was fired, whether the oncoming car had its flashing lights on, and whether the defendant had to back up in order to speed around the oncoming car and flee, which is what he did. The explanation offered for this conduct is that the defendant did not know the identity of the car or understand the pistol threat and the passenger and codefendant Reid told him to go on as he had a lot of money with him. This happened at about 11:30 p.m. Before the chase ended a bag with drugs was ejected from the passenger's side of the car. The police were working at the time on a tip pertaining to Reid. Eiland, supported by still another passenger in the car, offered a fairly circumstantial explanation as to why he happened to be with them. The main thrust of the appeal is that a video tape offered in evidence is unfair as to this defendant. Held:
1. Georgia follow a liberal policy in the admission of photographic evidence. Cagle Poultry & Egg Co. v. Busick, 110 Ga.App. 551, 552, 139 S.E.2d 461. Whether, under the evidence, the photograph or movie tape is a fair and accurate representation of the scene sought to be depicted addresses itself to the discretion of the trial judge which will not be controlled unless abused. Johnson v. State, 158 Ga. 192, 198, 123 S.E. 120; L & N R.R. v. Moreland, 122 Ga.App. 850, 178 S.E.2d 904. Where posed photographs shot at a later time are used and there is testimony as to immaterial variations between the picture and the scene, the judge's decision to admit the pictorial representation will not ordinarily be reversed. Curtis v. State, 224 Ga. 870, 165 S.E.2d 150.
However, photographs and especially movies which are posed, which are substantially different from the facts of the case, and which because of the differences might well be prejudicial and misleading to the jury, should not be used, and this is especially true where the situation or event sought to be depicted is simple, the testimony adequate, and the picture adds nothing except the visual image to the mental...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gates v. State
...and which because of the differences might be prejudicial and misleading to a jury, should not be used at trial. Eiland v. State, 130 Ga.App. 428, 203 S.E.2d 619 (1973). However, in this case we view the video tape recording as a pictorial confession rather than a posed reenactment of the c......
-
Chance v. State
...the events sought to be depicted. [Cit.]” Pickren v. State, 269 Ga. 453, 455(2), 500 S.E.2d 566 (1998). See also Eiland v. State, 130 Ga.App. 428, 429(1), 203 S.E.2d 619 (1973). In every photograph, each vehicle had been placed in the same position, such that the driver's side doors were qu......
-
State v. Walker
...... that the video was substantially similar to the actual events. and the risk of prejudice from inflammatory images. See , e.g. , State v. Stockmyer , 83. Wn.App. 77, 920 P.2d 1201 (1996); Dunkle v. State of. Oklahoma , 2006 OK CR 29, 139 P.3d 228 (2006); Eiland. v. State , 130 Ga.App. 428, 203 S.E.2d 619 (1973)). The. State argues that Walker's cases concerning reenactments. are inapposite. It asserts that the demonstrative evidence in. this case is analogous to that considered in Finch ,. We agree with the State. . ......
-
State v. Walker
...v. Stockmyer, 83 Wn. App. 77, 920 P.2d 1201 (1996); Dunkle v. State of Oklahoma, 2006 OK CR 29, 139 P.3d 228 (2006); Eiland v. State, 130 Ga.App. 428, 203 S.E.2d 619 (1973)). The State argues that Walker's cases concerning reenactments are inapposite. It asserts that the demonstrative evide......
-
Understanding and Challenging Photographic Evidence: What the Camera Never Saw
...(stating "videotapes are generally admissible with the same limitations and on the same grounds as photographs"). 21. Eiland v. State, 130 Ga. App. 428, 429, 203 S.E.2d 619, 621 (1973). 22. Id. 23. 269 Ga. 453, 500 S.E.2d 566 (1999). 24. Pickren, 269 Ga. at 456, 500 S.E.2d at 569-70; see al......