Haggard v. State
| Decision Date | 23 February 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,No. 41751,41751,2 |
| Citation | 113 Ga.App. 185,147 S.E.2d 469 |
| Parties | James A. HAGGARD v. The STATE |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
James Allen Haggard, Ralph Darrell Drake and Gary Godfrey, were jointly indicted for the larceny of two described automobiles. James Allen Haggard was tried separately and found guilty on each count. Thereafter, his motion for new trial was overruled and he filed his appeal enumerating as error the admission of evidence, excerpts of the charge, the overruling of his motion for a new trial and because the evidence was insufficient to authorize a conviction.
On the trial of the case each of the two co-indictees testified as to the conspiracy to steal the automobiles and their part of such actions. The defendant Haggard testified under oath and admitted that he was at the scene where one of the automobiles was stolen, that he heard the co-indictees talking about stealing such automobile and how they could dispose of it for a profit, but he denied that he was involved in such theft. Other evidence not necessary for decision of the case was also adduced on the trial.
Ballard & Thigpen, Troy R. Thigpen, Covington, for appellant.
Richard Bell, Sol. Gen., Decatur, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
1. Statements made under oath upon the trial of the case being heard are not declarations but testimony. Crawley v. Selby, 208 Ga. 530, 536, 67 S.E.2d 775.
2. 'One may be legally convicted of a felony other than treason or perjury, where the only evidence directly connecting him with the offense charged is the testimony of an accomplice, and where the only corroboration is the testimony of other accomplices.' Pope v. State, 171 Ga. 655, 156 S.E. 599.
3. "It is not error to admit evidence which is objected to as a whole when any part of that objected to is admissible. A party objecting to evidence must specify the portion which is objectionable, and if he fails to point out exactly that portion which is objectionable and move its exclusion he cannot complain that the whole of the evidence objected to, a part of which was admissible, was admitted over his objection. * * * Gully v. State, 116 Ga. 527(2), 42 S.E. 790.' Turner v. McKee, 97 Ga.App. 531, 536, 103 S.E.2d 658, 662.' Brantley v. Heller, 101 Ga.App. 16, 18, 112 S.E.2d 685, 687.
4. Where a defendant admits his presence at the scene of a crime and knowledge of the commission of the crime, but in the same breath denies his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Perkins v. State, 57922
...in a confession the entire criminal act is confessed. Johnson v. State, 204 Ga. 528, 530, 50 S.E.2d 334 (1948); Haggard v. State, 113 Ga.App. 185, 186(5), 147 S.E.2d 469 (1966). 6. Written across the top of the preprinted jury verdict form was the notation "Advised of rts. Sept. 6, 1978." W......
-
Fallaw v. Hobbs
... ... State Highway Dept. v. Porter, 96 Ga.App. 142, 143(1), 99 S.E.2d 519 ... Now let us examine the charge on the matter of comparative ... ...
-
Arnall v. State, 44771
...in Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368, 84 S.Ct. 1774, 12 L.Ed.2d 908. Sellers v. Dutton, 223 Ga. 358, 155 S.E.2d 23; Haggard v. State, 113 Ga.App. 185(4), 147 S.E.2d 469. The statement was admitted without objection, and this ground is without merit. Taylor v. State, 220 Ga. 801(3), 142 S.E.2d ......