Jackson v. State

• Decision Date: 16 April 1910
• Parties: JACKSON v. STATE.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

68 S.E. 71

134 Ga. 473

JACKSON v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Georgia

April 16, 1910

Syllabus by the Court.

It being in issue, under the evidence, as to whether there was a variance between the name by which the female alleged to have been assaulted was commonly known and the name set forth in the indictment, it was not error for the court to charge the jury touching this issue in the following language: "I charge you, if you find from the facts and circumstances of this case that the name set out in the indictment is the name by which the party was called, one that she recognized, and one by which she was known, it would be sufficient in law."

The extract from the charge above quoted is not open to criticism upon the ground that it expresses or intimates an opinion upon any fact involved in the case.

It is not a valid ground of criticism upon a charge correct and proper in itself that it fails to state some other rule or principle of law pertinent to the issues of the case.

There was sufficient evidence to support the verdict.

Error from Superior Court, Emanuel County; B. T. Rawlings, Judge.

Jim Jackson was convicted of crime, and brings error. Affirmed.

Saffold & Larsen, for plaintiff in error.

Alfred Herrington, Sol. Gen., Hines & Jordan, and Jno. C. Hart Atty. Gen., for the State.

BECK J.

The plaintiff in error, Jim Jackson, was charged with the offense of rape, alleged to have been committed upon one Neida Jackson. Upon the trial the jury returned a verdict of guilty, with a recommendation. A motion for a new trial was overruled, and defendant excepted.

In addition to the general grounds, complaining that the verdict was contrary to evidence and the law, and without evidence to support it, the motion for a new trial contained a special ground assigning error upon the following charge of the court: "I charge you, if you find from the facts and circumstances of this case that the name set out in the indictment is the name by which the party was called, one that she recognized, and one by which she was known, it would be sufficient in law." As to the name of the female alleged to have been assaulted, she testified: "My name is Nedia Jackson. I go by the name of Nedia Jackson. That is the name I am known and go by--Nedia Jackson. That is the name I answer to. They call me Nedia Jackson, and I answer to it. I took the name of Nedia Jackson, because my mother married him [Jim Jackson]. They don't always call me Nedia Jackson. If anybody meets me, they just call me Nedia; but if they write anything, they call me Nedia Jackson. They address me as Miss Nedia Jackson. People calling me just say, 'Hello, Nedia.' That is the name I answer to. They call me Nedia; but my real name is Nedia Jeeter, and when people call me they always call me Nedia." While the spelling of the Christian name of the party upon...