Horton v. State
| Decision Date | 15 January 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 1,No. 43869,43869,1 |
| Citation | 166 S.E.2d 47,119 Ga.App. 43 |
| Parties | B. H. HORTON v. The STATE |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Milton F. Gardner, James E. Peugh, Milledgeville, for appellant.
George D. Lawrence, Sol. Gen., Eatonton, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
1. 'On a review of the denial of a motion for new trial on the general grounds, the appellate courts decide only whether the verdict is supported by any evidence.' Wells v. State, 110 Ga.App. 507(1), 139 S.E.2d 151.
2. In this case the appellant was convicted of involuntary manslaughter. The indictment against him charged that he did unlawfully 'operate a motor vehicle on and over the public road and highway leading from Irwinton, Ga., to Dublin, Ga., known as U.S. Route 441, at a rate of speed greater than allowed by law, to-wit: 70 miles per hour in a 50 miles per hour zone, and did attempt to pass the vehicles operated in the same direction by one Malon Graham and Gladys E. Taylor, and the said Gladys E. Taylor was then and there properly making a left turn from said highway after having given proper signals, and while in the commission of said unlawful acts, without any intention to do so, killed one Gladys E. Taylor, a human being, who was then and there an occupant in the vehicle being struck by said Horton vehicle then and there on said highway, said wounds having been inflicted by the said Benjamin H. Horton operating said vehicle into and against the vehicle then and there operated by Gladys E. Taylor.'
It is appellant's contention that the evidence relied upon by the State to show excessive speed as charged in the indictment was the opinion evidence of the three witnesses who were standing back up the highway about 1,000 feet at night (the collision occurred shortly after midnight).
Each of the three witnesses stated that they were standing at the place from which the defendant had departed in his car and had observed his car from there to the point of the collision, and that he was 'gearing it,' 'getting it,' 'making it holler' and 'the tires were squalling.' They stated that the highway was straight; that there were some trees between them and the highway, but they could see the tail lights and hear the noises they described; and that they were watching appellant's car when the collision happened. They all testified that they were accustomed to the speed of an automobile from their own experience in driving and from observing other...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Shelnutt
...24-7-702." OCGA § 24-7-701 (a) ; accord Clack v. Hasnat , 354 Ga. App. 502, 503 (1), 841 S.E.2d 210 (2020) ; Horton v. State , 119 Ga. App. 43, 44 (3), 166 S.E.2d 47 (1969). Thus, a layperson's "opinion of speed is admissible in evidence when [the layperson] has testified as to the facts up......
-
Whidby v. Columbine Carrier, Inc.
...testimony being "very unreliable," we think that is the entire jury question. It has been held that even a lay witness (Horton v. State, 119 Ga.App. 43(3), 166 S.E.2d 47, or a teenage child could give an estimate of speed if he gives the facts and basis of his opinion. Gibbs v. Gianaris, 13......
-
Clack v. Hasnat
...facts upon which the opinion is based. The weight and consideration to be given such evidence is for the jury." Horton v. State , 119 Ga. App. 43, 44 (3), 166 S.E.2d 47 (1969) ; see also Fouts v. Builders Transport , 222 Ga. App. 568, 575 (1), 474 S.E.2d 746 (1996) ("It is well established ......