Jackson v. State
| Decision Date | 16 May 1957 |
| Docket Number | No. 19662,19662 |
| Citation | 98 S.E.2d 571,213 Ga. 275 |
| Parties | Stonewall JACKSON v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Jack B. Taylor, Davisboro, Newell J. Smith, E. T. Averett, Sandersville, for plaintiff in error.
W. H. Lanier, Solicitor-Gen., Metter, Eugene Cook, Atty. Gen., Rubye G. Jackson, Atlanta, for defendant in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
The defendant was convicted of murder with a recommendation of mercy. His motion for new trial on the general and two special grounds was denied and he excepts.
Numerous eyewitnesses to the killing testified to the following facts: The defendant and the deceased got into an argument in a churchyard over the location of a grave that the deceased had dug. Following the argument, the deceased picked up the tools with which he had been digging, walked a short distance to his car, and put the tools in it. The defendant also walked to his car, and, as he passed one of the witnesses, was heard to curse and say, 'I am going to kill him.' The defendant got in his car, started the motor, and backed out into a roadway that led from the highway onto the church grounds. About this time someone called to the deceased that he he left a tool at the graveside, and the deceased started across the roadway towards where he had been digging the grave. The defendant, his motor racing and the wheels of the car kicking up the dirt, drove his car towards the highway and towards the deceased who had started across the roadway. The deceased jumped back out of the roadway. The defendant, his motor racing, turned his car to the left, out of the roadway and towards the deceased and hit him. The impact threw the deceased up on the hood of the car for a few moments before he fell under the car and was dragged a short distance, the wheels finally passing over his body. The defendant, the wheels of his car still kicking up the dirt, turned into the highway without stopping and was later apprehended by police officers. Held:
1. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the general grounds of the motion for new trial are without merit.
2. In special ground on of the motion for new trial, a lengthy extract from the testimony of L. H. Barron, a deputy sheriff and witness for the State, was objected to as being a conclusion and hearsay. This witness stated, in the part of his testimony objected to in this ground, that he went to the scene of the crime and made an examination of the premises, taking measurements and drawing a diagram of the scene as he found it, the diagram being exhibited to the jury. He testigied as to certain signs he observed upon the ground and as to automobile tire tracks at the scene. While it might be inferable from the witness's testimony that certain facts to which he testified were based partially upon his conversation with witnesses who had been present when the deceased was killed, nevertheless a part of the testimony included in this ground is obviously not subject to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Henry
...(Tex.App.1997) ; Thompson v. State, 589 So.2d 1013 (Fla.App.1991) ; State v. Brown, 310 Or. 347, 800 P.2d 259 (1990) ; Jackson v. State, 213 Ga. 275, 98 S.E.2d 571 (1957).60 See, McMartin v. State, supra note 59 ; Moyer v. State, supra note 59 ; Thompson v. State, supra note 59 ; State v. B......
-
Globe Motors, Inc. v. Noonan, 39616
...part of evidence objected to as a whole is not subject to the objection made, it is proper to overrule the objection. Jackson v. State, 213 Ga. 275, 276, 98 S.E.2d 571; Lassiter v. Poss, 85 Ga.App. 785, 789, 70 S.E.2d 411; Desverges v. Marchant, 18 Ga.App. 248, 249, 89 S.E. 221. 6. It is er......
-
Scott v. State
...of the cases of Smith v. State, 203 Ga. 317(4), 46 S.E.2d 583; Ogletree v. State, 209 Ga. 413(3), 73 S.E.2d 201; Jackson v. State, 213 Ga. 275(3), 98 S.E.2d 571 and Satterfield v. State, 68 Ga.App. 7, 21 S.E.2d 861 are not authority for reversal on this point, although they virtually approv......
-
Brown v. State
...overruling the objection will not be reversed if any part of the evidence is not subject to the objection made. See Jackson v. State, 213 Ga. 275(2), 98 S.E.2d 571; Gully v. State, 116 Ga. 527(2), 42 S.E. 790; Barnard v. State, 119 Ga. 436(3), 46 S.E. Judgment affirmed. BELL, P.J., and JOSL......