Hawkins v. State, 75493

Decision Date16 February 1988
Docket NumberNo. 75493,75493
Citation185 Ga.App. 837,366 S.E.2d 222
PartiesHAWKINS v. The STATE.
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

Linda B. Borsky, Atlanta, for appellant.

Thomas J. Charron, Dist. Atty., James F. Morris, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.

CARLEY, Judge.

Appellant was tried before a jury and found guilty of theft by deception, theft by receiving stolen property, and removal and falsification of vehicle identification numbers with the intent to convert the vehicles. He appeals from the judgments of conviction and sentences entered on the jury's verdicts.

1. Appellant enumerates a portion of the trial court's pre-evidentiary statement to the jury as erroneous.

Error, if any, in that portion of the trial court's pre-evidentiary statement under consideration was rendered harmless by the trial court's subsequent giving of a correct charge on the legal principle involved. "[A] pre-evidentiary statement is not the equivalent of a jury charge; even if a portion thereof had been incorrect, where the principles of law were thoroughly covered in the main charge, the initial statement would not have misled the jury and would be harmless error. [Cit.]" Farmer v. State, 180 Ga.App. 720, 721(1c), 350 S.E.2d 583 (1986). See also Phillips v. State, 183 Ga.App. 194(1), 358 S.E.2d 480 (1987). This enumeration is without merit.

2. The trial court admitted, over appellant's best evidence objection, certain documents purporting to show that a Mr. Jones owned a certain automobile.

Even assuming that the admission of this documentary evidence was error, there was other uncontradicted evidence offered at trial to show that Mr. Jones had purchased the automobile and was its owner. See generally Hightower v. Berlin, 129 Ga.App. 246, 248(5), 199 S.E.2d 335 (1973). "The admission of improper evidence is harmless when the fact sought to be shown is otherwise fully and properly established. [Cits.] Thus, even if the admission of the [documentary] evidence had been error, it was cumulative and harmless." Barrett v. State, 146 Ga.App. 207, 207-208, 245 S.E.2d 890 (1978). See also Garrett v. State, 156 Ga.App. 33(2), 274 S.E.2d 80 (1980).

Judgment affirmed.

BANKE, P.J., and BENHAM, J., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Moon v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • November 30, 1988
    ...no reversible error in the admission of documentary evidence of ownership of automobiles stolen by the defendant. Hawkins v. State, 185 Ga.App. 837(2), 366 S.E.2d 222 (1988). 22. Before a ballistics expert testified, Moon objected that he had not been served with a summary of the expert's r......
  • Duke Trucking Co. v. Giles, 75444
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • February 16, 1988
  • Clifton v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • March 17, 1989
    ...purported telephonic admission to Hurley was cumulative of his incriminating statement to Investigator Turner. See Hawkins v. State, 185 Ga.App. 837(2), 366 S.E.2d 222. Further, it is undisputed that defendant's statement to Investigator Turner was voluntary and that defendant's incriminati......
  • Malone v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • December 20, 1995
    ...is not the equivalent of a jury charge." Farmer v. State, 180 Ga.App. 720, 721(1), 350 S.E.2d 583 (1986). See also Hawkins v. State, 185 Ga.App. 837(1), 366 S.E.2d 222 (1988); Levesque v. State, 172 Ga.App. 760, 761, 324 S.E.2d 580 (1984). Reservation of objections to the main charge does n......
  • 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