Hilton v. State, 29096
| Decision Date | 08 October 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 29096,29096 |
| Citation | 233 Ga. 11,209 S.E.2d 606 |
| Parties | John Robert HILTON v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Jacques O. Partain, III, Atlanta, for appellant.
Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., John W. Dunsmore, Deputy Asst. Atty. Gen., Atlanta, for appellee. Syllabus Opinion by the Court
Defendant appeals from his conviction for murder by shooting and killing the victim with a pistol and from the denial of his motion for new trial. The appeal presents two enumerations of error.
1. Defendant contends his character was placed into evidence by the manner in which his photographs were tendered for admission without his first introducing evidence of his good character or reputation. The transcript shows that a police officer, testifying on the manner in which he conducted a pictorial lineup, stated that he had obtained the photographs from the department's 'identification section' and that witnesses of the shooting identified the defendant from one of the photographs as having been the person who fatally shot the victim. Defense counsel objected and moved for a mistrial which was overruled. We find no reversible error. The transcript contains no evidence that the police photographs showed to the witnesses contained any indication that the defendant had been guilty of any prior crimes. Further, there is no indication that the witnesses learned from the photographs that the defendant had any prior criminal record. The photographs were never shown to the jury, nor were they introduced into evidence. See Creamer v. State, 229 Ga. 704, 194 S.E.2d 73; Tanner v. State, 228 Ga. 829, 188 S.E.2d 512; Cooper v. State, 182 Ga. 42, 184 S.E. 716.
2. The other issue here enumerates as error a sentence in the charge that 'a person also commits the crime of murder where, in the commission of a felony he causes the death of another human being irrespective of malice.' There was no evidence of an independent felony other than the homicide. The court fully instructed the jury on the definition of murder applicable in this case. Code Ann. § 26-1101(a). Also in the charge immediately following that quoted above, the court properly limited the jury's deliberation to murder committed with malice aforethought, either express or implied. Before a charge will constitute reversible error, the charge in question must be viewed in regard to the charge as a whole. Domingo v. State,212 Ga. 342, 92 S.E.2d 520. In our opinion the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Collier v. State
...1 (1977); Hall v. State, 241 Ga. 252, 244 S.E.2d 833 (1977); Berryhill v. Ricketts, 242 Ga. 447, 249 S.E.2d 197 (1978). Hilton v. State, 233 Ga. 11, 209 S.E.2d 606 (1974). However, appellant's argument goes further and urges that under the facts of this case, he could not have been convicte......
-
Phagan v. State
...that appellant and the other woman were guilty of prior crime, had criminal records, or were engaged in bad acts. Hilton v. State, 233 Ga. 11(1), 209 S.E.2d 606 (1974). 11. OCGA § 17-16-7 was not violated when the statement at issue was oral and was neither recorded nor committed to writing......
-
Amadeo v. State
...only charged criminal attempt under Code Ann. § 26-1001. The charge taken as a whole could not have harmed Amadeo. Hilton v. State, 233 Ga. 11(2), 209 S.E.2d 606 (1974). The trial court explained this portion of the charge to the jury as follows: "Now let me say that he is not charged with ......
-
Patterson v. State
...v. State, 235 Ga. 693(5), 221 S.E.2d 547 (1975); Proctor v. State, 235 Ga. 720, 726-727, 221 S.E.2d 556 (1975); Hilton v. State, 233 Ga. 11, 12, 209 S.E.2d 606 (1974). Appellant's argument on this point fails to show reversible error. b. As his second attack on these charges, appellant clai......