Griner v. State

Decision Date26 January 1905
Citation121 Ga. 614,49 S.E. 700
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court
PartiesGRINER v. STATE.

CRIMINAL LAW—INSTRUCTIONS — CONFESSIONS —CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

1. It was not error to refuse to instruct the jury, as requested, that "evidence of confessions is the weakest and least to be relied on of any evidence known to be competent in law" (Calvin v. State, 44 S. E. 848, 118 Ga. 73), especially when the court charged the jury that confessions of guilt should be received with great caution, and that a confession alone, uncorroborated by other evidence, will not justify a conviction.

2. "The law of circumstantial evidence is not, without qualification, applicable in a case where the state proves a positive confession of guilt." Perry v. State, 36 S. E. 781, 110 Ga. 234. Therefore in such a case it was not error to fail "to charge the jury on the law of circumstantial evidence, " or that, "to warrant a conviction on circumstantial evidence, the proven facts must not only be consistent with the hypothesis of guilt, but must exclude every other reasonable hypothesis save that of the guilt of the accused."

3. "When, after a proper preliminary examination as to their free and voluntary nature, confessions * * * are adjudged competent and received in evidence, there is no room for any question touching the propriety of having conducted the preliminary examination in the presence of the jury." Fletcher v. State, 17 S. E. 100, 90 Ga. 468.

4. The alleged confessions were properly held admissible.

5. The instructions given to the jury fully covered the requests to charge that "proof of the corpus delicti may be, but is not necessarily, sufficient corroboration of a confession of guilt, and that "the law does not fix the amount of corroboration—the jury are the judges."

6. Before a confession can be considered as evidence, it must appear to have been made voluntarily, without being induced by another by the slighest hope of benefit or remotest fear of injury. Pen. Code 1895, § 1006.

(a) If induced by another, by hope of benefit or fear of injury, it is involuntary, although such inducement be held out by one person, and the confession be subsequently made to another, who has no knowledge of such inducement, and who offers none himself. Where there is evi dence of a confession before the jury, It is for them to determine from all the evidence whether the confession was voluntary.

(b) Accordingly, where the principle is applicable to the case, either under the evidence or the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Sutton v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 16 Marzo 1916
    ... ... corroborated by satisfactory proof of the corpus delicti ... outside of the confession, and that the sufficiency of the ... corroboration of a confession is a question for the jury ( ... Coley v. State, 110 Ga. 271, 34 S.E. 845; Davis v ... State, supra; Griner v. State, 121 Ga. 614, 49 S.E ... 700; Holsenbake v. State, 45 Ga. 44; Cook v ... State, 9 Ga.App. 208, 70 S.E. 1019), we cannot say that ... the verdict in this case was unauthorized under the law ...          As was ... said in Smith v. State, 64 Ga. 605: ... "Arson can seldom ... ...
  • Sutton v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 16 Marzo 1916
    ...corroboration of a confession is a question for the jury (Coley v. State, 110 Ga. 271, 34 S. E. 845; Davis v. State, supra; Griner v. State, 121 Ga. 614, 49 S. E. 700; Holsenbake v. State, 45 Ga. 44; Cook v. State, 9 Ga. App. 208, 70 S. E. 1019), we cannot say that the verdict in this case ......
  • Duren v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 24 Julio 1924
    ...court to charge upon that subject is not cause for reversal. Harris v. State, 152 Ga. 193, 108 S.E. 777, and cases cited; Griner v. State, 121 Ga. 614, 49 S.E. 700. The evidence was sufficient to support the verdict. Error from Superior Court, Ware County; J. I. Summerall, Judge. Mrs. Nora ......
  • Duren v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 24 Julio 1924
    ...by only five Justices, is not binding as authority, and is not supported by the decisions which it cites. In the case of Griner v. State, 121 Ga. 614, 49 S. E. 700, the state relied for conviction upon circumstantial evidence and a "confession." In view of what has been said above, the resu......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT