Hawkins v. State
| Decision Date | 21 September 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 42970,No. 2,42970,2 |
| Citation | 116 Ga.App. 448,157 S.E.2d 800 |
| Parties | Willie HAWKINS v. The STATE |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
John W. Rogers, Atlanta, for appellant.
Lewis R. Slaton, Sol. Gen., J. Walter LeCraw, George K. McPherson, Atlanta, for appellee. Syllabus Opinion by the Court
The defendant was tried for murder and convicted of involuntary manslaughter. Two errors are enumerated on the appeal, both complaining of portions of the court's charge to which defendant failed to make any objection before a verdict was returned by the jury.
Failure to make objection to the charge before the return of a verdict by the jury, as is required by Sec. 17(a) of the Appellate Practice Act (), presents nothing for review. Phillips v. State, 114 Ga.App. 417(3), 151 S.E.2d 474; Crider v. State of Ga., 115 Ga.App. 347(2), 154 S.E.2d 743; Carnes v. State, 115 Ga.App. 387, 392(5), 154 S.E.2d 781; Barnes v. State, 115 Ga.App. 431(1), 154 S.E.2d 878; Smith v. State, 116 Ga.App. 45(4), 156 S.E.2d 380.
Appellant asks that the court review the errors enumerated under Sec. 17(c) (Code Ann. § 70-207(c)) of the aforementioned Act. Under Sec. 17(c) substantial errors in a charge harmful as a matter of law, and which this court may consider and review irrespective of whether timely objections were made, are those errors from which a gross injustice is about to result or has resulted, directly attributable to the alleged errors. Nathan v. Duncan, 113 Ga.App. 630(6), 149 S.E.2d 383; Windsor Forest, Inc. v. Rocker, 115 Ga.App. 317, 324(4), 154 S.E.2d 627.
The court has examined the entire record in the case and finds under the above principles that the alleged errors present nothing for review.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Holcomb v. Kirby, s. 43112
...Moon v. Kimberly, 116 Ga.App. 74(2), 156 S.E.2d 414; City of Douglas v. Rigdon, 116 Ga.App. 306(2), 157 S.E.2d 66, and Hawkins v. State, 116 Ga.App. 448, 157 S.E.2d 800. The situation presented here does not meet these tests. Cf. Williams v. State, 223 Ga. 773(4), 158 S.E.2d 373. It does no......
-
Miller v. State
...582. Consequently, we hold the error alleged in this enumeration presents nothing to review under OCGA § 5-5-24(c). Hawkins v. State, 116 Ga.App. 448, 157 S.E.2d 800. Judgment JOHNSON, C.J., and PHIPPS, J., concur. 1. Inasmuch as the State did not seek to introduce this evidence and the tri......
-
Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Daugherty, 42871
... ... the allegations of the petition are sufficient to place the defendant on notice of certain facts from which a jury might infer negligence, the state court should refrain from imposing additional pleading requirements based on local procedures which might be regarded as imposing an unnecessary ... ...