Harris v. State
| Decision Date | 14 February 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. 18821,18821 |
| Citation | 85 S.E.2d 770,211 Ga. 327 |
| Parties | Alfred HARRIS v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. The court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for a continuance.
2. The evidence was insufficient to show that the defendant was insane at the time of the homicide.
3. The evidence fully supported the verdict.
Archie L. Gleason, George Dawson, Augusta, for plaintiff in error.
George Hains, Sol. Gen., Augusta, Eugene Cook, Atty. Gen., Joan Larsen, Atlanta, for defendant in error.
On May 24, 1954, a grand jury of Richmond County returned a true bill against Alfred Harris, the indictment charging that the defendant on May 14, 1954, did kill and murder Oscar Willingham by shooting him in the head with a rifle and by assaulting, beating, and striking him on the head and body with some blunt instrument. The case coming on for trial before a court and jury, a verdict was returned on June 28, 1954, finding the defendant guilty without a recommendation, and he was sentenced to be electrocuted. His motion for a new trial, on the general grounds and as amended, was denied, and error is assigned on the order denying this motion.
1. The sole ground in the amended motion asserts that the court erred in denying the defendant's oral motion for a continuance. At the beginning of the trial, counsel for the defendant orally moved the court for a continuance, the ground of the motion being that the defendant did not have counsel representing him until six days before his trial, when the court appointed two attorneys to represent him. It appears that counsel had one examination of the defendant made by a psychiatrist as to the former's mental condition, and from his report he recommended further psychiatric examination, and counsel wanted further time for examination, and thought that, if counsel had ample time for further examination, they would be able to show that he was insane.
The grant of motions for continuance is within the sound discretion of the trial judge, and this court will not interfere unless it is clearly shown that he abused his discretion. Code § 81-1419; Griffin v. State, 208 Ga. 746(2), 69 S.E.2d 192. In Blackston v. State, 209 Ga. 160, 71 S.E.2d 221, 222, which was a murder case, we held: 'The basis for a continuance here being that counsel did not have sufficient time in four days to obtain the defendant's Army records to determine his sanity at the time of his discharge therefrom, and to investigate his family background as to insanity, the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in refusing to grant the continuance, as the only reason offered by counsel was his information and belief that he might be able to find evidence and no showing was made that the above was true.' In the same connection, see also McLendon v. State, 209 Ga. 55(2), 52...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Morgan v. State, 50321
...150 S.E.2d 638; Chadwick v. State, 221 Ga. 574(1), 146 S.E.2d 283; Adams v. State, 214 Ga. 131(1), 103 S.E.2d 550; Harris v. State, 211 Ga. 327(1), 85 S.E.2d 770; Blackston v. State, 209 Ga. 160(2), 71 S.E.2d 221; Griffin v. State, 208 Ga. 746(2), 69 S.E.2d 192. A reading of these cases and......
-
Pulliam v. State
...that would justify our reversal of the trial court's judgment. See Domingo v. State, 211 Ga. 691, 88 S.E.2d 1 (1955); Harris v. State, 221 Ga. 327, 85 S.E.2d 770 (1955); and, Griffin v. State, 208 Ga. 746, 69 S.E.2d 192 Juror Selection Appellant insists the trial court erred in excluding po......
-
Payne v. Jones, 18815
... ... In Webb v. Harris, 124 G.a 723, 730, 53 S.E. 247, 250, it was held: 'If the wife conveys to the husband, she has the right to elect either to apply to the superior ... ...
-
Dutton v. State, 27010
... ... 852] abused his discretion in this regard. Moore v. State, 202 Ga. 357(2), 42 S.E.2d 251; Butts v. State, 211 Ga. 16(1), 83 S.E.2d 610; Harris ... v. State, 211 Ga. 327, 328, 85 S.E.2d 770; Corbin v. State, 212 Ga. 231(1), 91 S.E.2d 764; Hall v. State, 213 Ga. 557(1), 100 S.E.2d 176. The motion for a continuance in this case is based on the ground of inflammatory newspaper publicity concerning the crime and stands on substantially the ... ...
-
Legal Ethics - Jack L. Sammons
...Interestingly, Tante could be read broadly to mean that a sexual relationship with a married client is a disbarable offense. 166. 211 Ga. at 327, 439 S.E.2d at 10. 167. Id. at 328, 439 S.E.2d at 10-11. 168. Id., 439 S.E.2d at 10. 169. Id., 439 S.E.2d at 11. 170. See supra note 125. 171. Dav......