Johnson v. State, 29934.

• Court: United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
• Writing for the Court: MacINTYRE
• Citation: 25 S.E.2d 584
• Parties: JOHNSON. v. STATE.
• Docket Number: No. 29934.,29934.
• Decision Date: 29 April 1943

25 S.E.2d 584

JOHNSON.

v.STATE.

No. 29934.

Court of Appeals of Georgia,

Division No. 1.

April 29, 1943.

Syllabus by the Court.

1. It is competent, where relevant, for a witness to testify that the defendant was

under the influence of intoxicating liquor. It is competent for the reason that it is a statement of fact actually observed by the witness at the time as evidenced by the defendant's conduct and appearance. Cavender v. State, 46 Ga.App. 782(2), 169 S.E. 253; State v. Jessup, 183 N.C 771, 111 S.E. 523(4).

2. It is not reversible error to fail to charge on confessions in the absence of a request.

3. The probation conditions embodied in the sentence are not illegal or unreasonable and may be imposed under authority stated in Davis v. State, 53 Ga.App. 325, 185 S.E. 400, and cit.

4. The evidence authorized the verdict.

Error from Superior Court, Cobb County; J. H. Hawkins, Judge.

J. H. Johnson was convicted of driving an automobile while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, and he brings error.

Affirmed.

Gordon B. Gann, of Marietta, for plaintiff in error.

H. G. Vandiviere, Sol. Gen., of Canton, for defendant in error.

MacINTYRE, Judge.

The defendant was convicted of driving an automobile on the public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. Allgood, a witness for the State, testified in part as follows: "On last Saturday night this defendant now on trial, J. H. Johnson, was turned over to me and Mr. Ward by some one else. Regarding his condition at that time, and whether or not he was under the influence of intoxicating liquors, wines, or beers--well, he was drinking, and I would call him considerably under the influence. I have only known this boy since Saturday night." There was testimony by another witness, Hicks, that the defendant was "under the influence of intoxicating liquor. * * * Well, he was drinking." Another witness, Ward, testified: "I and some one else with me brought him here to jail. Regarding his condition relative to being under the influence of liquor, he was drinking. He told me that he had drunk a couple of bottles of beer, as well as I remember. He also told me that he had had a wreck down there, and I asked him why he left the scene of the accident and he said he didn't know why he left. I said he told me that he had had a couple of bottles of beer. As to whether or not a couple of bottles of beer would make a man drunk, well it smelled like he had had more than two. I think beer smells stronger than...