Golden v. State

Decision Date01 December 1982
Docket NumberNo. 39136,39136
CitationGolden v. State, 250 Ga. 428, 297 S.E.2d 479 (Ga. 1982)
PartiesGOLDEN v. The STATE.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Richard D. Phillips, Ludowici, for Annie Jane Golden.

Dupont K. Cheney, Dist. Atty., Harrison W. Kohler, Asst. Dist. Atty., Hinesville, Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., Virginia H. Jeffries, Staff Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

WELTNER, Justice.

Annie Jane Golden was convicted in Liberty County for the murder of Peter Robertson, Jr., and sentenced to life imprisonment.

According to the evidence, the victim had been drunk when, earlier that evening at the Goldens' home and in the presence of Mrs. Golden's husband, he had accused Mrs. Golden of marital infidelity. Words were exchanged between the Goldens after the victim left. Mrs. Golden then placed a kitchen knife in her handbag and went to a local nightclub where her mother was employed. The victim apparently followed her there, and repeated the accusation. Mrs. Golden then threw a glass of beer in his face. She testified that she killed him with the kitchen knife in self-defense when he stepped toward her.

Witnesses testified that the victim and Mrs. Golden were across the bar from each other; that she leaned across the bar and killed him with a single thrust of the knife into his chest.

1. The indictment alleged only malice murder, the court charged the law of malice murder and felony murder, and the jury returned a verdict of felony murder. There is no merit to Mrs. Golden's contention, regarding the court's charge on the felony murder, that the same act or blow--here the single thrust of the knife--cannot constitute an aggravated assault forming the basis for a conviction for felony murder. Baker v. State, 236 Ga. 754, 225 S.E.2d 269 (1976), Phelps v. State, 245 Ga. 338(1), 265 S.E.2d 53 (1980), Sutton v. State, 245 Ga. 192(1), 264 S.E.2d 184 (1980), Braxton v. State, 240 Ga. 10, 239 S.E.2d 339 (1977). Nor has Mrs. Golden been denied due process or subjected to double jeopardy. McKenzie v. State, 248 Ga. 294, 295(3), 282 S.E.2d 95 (1981).

2. A charge on the law of involuntary manslaughter was not requested, and failure to give it was not error. State v. Stonaker, 236 Ga. 1, 222 S.E.2d 354 (1976).

3. The substance of Mrs. Golden's request to charge relating to her statement was charged by the court, and the court's failure to charge in the exact language of her written request was not error. Nelson v. State, 247 Ga. 172(12), 274 S.E.2d 317 (1981).

4. Twelve times during the charge to the jury, the court referred to Mrs. Golden's admission as a "statement." Once the reference was to "any alleged statement or confession." Four times the court referred to "confessions" or "confession." The use of the word "confession" is enumerated as error.

"If the trial judges would avoid use of the word 'confession' in questionable cases and instead use the word 'admission' in each instance where they might otherwise use the word 'confession' or 'statement,' this entire problem would vanish." Johnson v. State, 242 Ga. 822, 825, 251 S.E.2d 563 (1979). This advice--once more unheeded--the problem--once more--arises.

A review of...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
10 cases
  • Chandler v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • July 3, 1991
    ...129 (1989); Hill v. State, 259 Ga. 655, 386 S.E.2d 133 (1989); Harrison v. State, 251 Ga. 837, 310 S.E.2d 506 (1984); Golden v. State, 250 Ga. 428, 297 S.E.2d 479 (1982); Respress v. State, 249 Ga. 731, 293 S.E.2d 319 (1982); Smith v. State, 247 Ga. 453, 276 S.E.2d 633 (1981); Music v. Stat......
  • Lolley v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • November 9, 1989
    ...254 Ga. 162, 164, 326 S.E.2d 438 (1985). Accord, Harrison v. State, 251 Ga. 837, 838-839, 310 S.E.2d 506 (1984); Golden v. State, 250 Ga. 428, 297 S.E.2d 479 (1982); Music v. State, 244 Ga. 832, 262 S.E.2d 128 2. When Lolley surrendered himself, he volunteered to the jailer, with no prompti......
  • Mattox v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • January 26, 1988
    ...did not contribute to the verdict in this case. E.g., Richards v. State, 251 Ga. 447(1), 306 S.E.2d 302 (1983); Golden v. State, 250 Ga. 428(4), 297 S.E.2d 479 (1982), cert. den., 460 U.S. 1046, 103 S.Ct. 1448, 75 L.Ed.2d 802 6. We find no error in the trial court's striking, sua sponte, a ......
  • Richards v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • September 9, 1983
    ...'statement,' this entire problem would vanish." Johnson v. State, 242 Ga. 822, 825, 251 S.E.2d 563 (1979). See also Golden v. State, 250 Ga. 428(4), 297 S.E.2d 479 (1982). GREGORY, Justice, concurring I concur in the judgment and write only to point out that I would not base Division One of......
  • Get Started for Free