Irby v. State
| Decision Date | 08 October 1894 |
| Parties | IRBY v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. The showing for a continuance not stating that the witness who was confined in the county jail was too unwell to appear and testify, there was no error in denying the continuance; the court, at the conclusion of the state's evidence offering to have the witness brought from the jail, for the purpose of testifying in behalf of the accused, and the offer being declined.
2. Before admitting a confession in evidence, the presiding judge should see to it that the confession was made freely and voluntarily; but where it affirmatively appears by the witness who heard the confession that he held out no inducement, and did nothing to excite either hope or fear and knew of nothing done by others to induce the confession it is prima facie admissible, and the court, before admitting it, is not bound to hear evidence offered by the accused which might show coercion or the excitement of fear or hope as inducement to confess. Such evidence, however, may afterwards be adduced to the jury; and it will be for them to determine, under all the evidence submitted, whether or not the confession was free and voluntary. Dawson v State, 59 Ga. 333.
3. There being nothing in the evidence or in the prisoner's statement tending to show that the confession admitted in evidence was influenced by reward or the hope thereof, a request to charge the jury that the confession should not be considered if the jury believed from the evidence and the statement of the defendant, taken together, that it was influenced by fear of injury, or by reward or hope thereof, and that whether it was so induced was a fact for the jury to find, was properly denied. The language of the request was more comprehensive than the statements, whether taken with the evidence or without it, rendered pertinent or appropriate.
4. There being nothing in the evidence touching the element of self-defense, or any grade of homicide except murder, and no request having been made to charge the jury on self-defense, failure to charge on it was not error, although the prisoner's statement may have presented the question, the court having charged on the statement in terms of the statute. Darby v. State, 3 S.E. 663, 79 Ga. 63; Underwood v. State, 13 S.E. 856, 88 Ga. 47.
Error from superior court, Bartow county; T. W. Milner, Judge.
Jeff Irby was convicted of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Hofer
...v. Wells, 35 Utah 400, 100 P. 681, 683,136 Am.St.Rep. 1059,19 Ann.Cas. 631;Wilburn v. State, 141 Ga. 510, 81 S.E. 444;Irby v. State, 95 Ga. 467, 20 S.E. 218. The court should permit cross examination of the witnesses called by the state on the preliminary inquiry. 20 Am.Jur. 455, section 53......
-
State v. Hofer
... ... support in 20 Am.Jur. 458, section 540; Commonwealth v ... Weiss, 284 Pa. 105, 130 A. 403; Commonwealth v. Aston, 227 ... Pa. 112, 75 A. 1019, 1020; State v. Wells, 35 Utah 400, 100 ... P. 681, 683, 136 Am.St.Rep. 1059, 19 Ann.Cas. 631; Wilburn v ... State, 141 Ga. 510, 81 S.E. 444; Irby v. State, 95 Ga. 467, ... 20 S.E. 218 ... The court ... should permit cross examination of the witnesses called by ... the state on the preliminary inquiry. 20 Am.Jur. 455, section ... 534. This is substantially the holding in State v. Fidment, ... 35 Iowa 541. Here such ... ...
-
Garrett v. State
...855(3, 4) 40 S.E. 1015; Carr v. State, 84 Ga. 250, 255, 10 S.E. 626; Thomas v. State, 84 Ga. 613(3, 5), 619, 10 S.E. 1016; Irby v. State, 95 Ga. 467(2), 20 S.E. 218; Claybourn v. State, 190 Ga. 861, 866, 11 S.E.2d * * * where the voluntary character of a confession is made to appear by uneq......
-
Whisman v. State
...of injury they should not consider it in their deliberations. See Sims v. State, 221 Ga. 190, 144 S.E.2d 103; Code § 38-411; Irby v. State, 95 Ga. 467, 20 S.E.2d 218; Cantrell v. State, 141 Ga. 98(4), 80 S.E. 649; Garrett v. State, 203 Ga. 756, 48 S.E.2d 377. These grounds are without merit......