Kennemore v. State
| Decision Date | 09 June 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 23464,23464 |
| Citation | 222 Ga. 252,149 S.E.2d 471 |
| Parties | William KENNEMORE v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Where two or more persons acting jointly and with a common purpose commit a criminal offense, they may be jointly or separately indicted. Snead v. State, 165 Ga. 44(3), 139 S.E. 812; Hamilton v. State, 54 Ga.App. 249, 187 S.E. 594. Conspiracy to commit murder need not be alleged in the indictment. Turner v. State, 138 Ga. 808(2), 76 S.E. 349. It was not error to overrule the motion to squash the indictment because another charged with the same offense had been previously convicted.
2. It was not error to overrule the defendant's motion to suppress certain physical evidence (a shotgun barrel) and the testimony of an alleged confession to be given by a witness for the State as complained of in enumeration of errors 2, 21, 23, 33 and 34.
3. It was not error to admit the testimony of State witnesses Angel, Stells and Marlowe as complained of in enumerated errors 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 26 and 27 over the objection that the testimony was hearsay.
4. The court did not err in admitting the testimony of State witnesses Meyers, Akin and Smith as to incriminating statements made by the defendant to them shortly after the alleged killing of Marlowe and before his arrest, as complained of in enumerated errors 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 24 and 25. The court was authorized to find from their testimony prima facie that the defendant's statements were freely and voluntarily made, and this issue was in the charge of the court left for determination by the jury. Bryant v. State, 191 Ga. 686(1), 13 S.E.2d 820.
5. It was not error for the court to admit in evidence the testimony of State witnesses Stewart, Hudson, Underwood, Patton and Elrod as to their observing on the night of February 27, 1965, two automobiles on public highway U.S. 129 between Gainesville and Jefferson, one 'chasing' the other. When taken in connection with other evidence, it was admissible as identifying the defendant and his brother in one car and the deceased Marlowe in another at the time and place near where the deceased's body and his wrecked car were found. This disposes of enumerated errors 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32.
6. The court did not err in admitting certain physical evidence and permitting such evidence to be carried to the jury room and refusing to declare a mistrial on the ground that the physical evidence was admitted when the jury was not in the courtroom. This ruling disposes of grounds 22, 38 and 39.
7. The court's instructions to the jury on the law of conspiracy was authorized by the evidence and not subject to the criticism in enumerated grounds 36 and 37.
8. It was not error for the court to permit the State's counsel to plead entrapment and cross examine State witness Ann Akins.
9. The verdict is supported by the evidence.
C. Winfred Smith, Gainesville, for appellant.
Floyd Hoard, Sol. Gen., Davis & Davidson, Jefferson, Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Atlanta, for appellee.
Under an indictment charging the appellant with the murder of Donald Marlowe on February 27, 1965, he was on his trial found guilty with a recommendation of mercy and sentenced to life imprisonment. He filed a notice of appeal and enumerates 43 errors.
Only headnotes 2 and 9 need elaboration.
2. Police officers in DeKalb County obtained a warrant to search the premises of Lawrence Kennemore, a brother of the defendant, on March 8, 1965. They executed the warrant and found nothing. They made a second visit on the same day finding Lawrence Kennemore at home. Kennemore took the officers to the back yard with him and dug up a shotgun barrel which was turned over to the officers.
Defendant moved to suppress the use of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Dixson
...S.Ct. 2170, 60 L.Ed.2d 1050 (1979); People v. Barbarick, 168 Cal.App.3d 731, 747 n. 3, 214 Cal.Rptr. 322 (1985); Kennemore v. State, 222 Ga. 252, 254, 149 S.E.2d 471 (1966); Giddens v. State, 156 Ga.App. 258, 259, 274 S.E.2d 595 (1980), cert. den. 450 U.S. 1026, 101 S.Ct. 1733, 68 L.Ed.2d 2......
-
Giddens v. State
...152 Ga.App. 760, 761(1A), 264 S.E.2d 258; Patterson v. State, 133 Ga.App. 742, 745(2), 212 S.E.2d 858. See also Kennemore v. State, 222 Ga. 252, 254(2), 149 S.E.2d 471. 2. During the state's closing argument to the jury the district attorney stated: "I don't believe any farmers were left on......
-
Thompson v. State, s. 59468
...of contraband in the open fields of another. Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57, 44 S.Ct. 445, 68 L.Ed. 898 (1924); Kennemore v. State, 222 Ga. 252, 149 S.E.2d 471 (1966). See also Anderson v. State, 133 Ga.App. 45, 209 S.E.2d 665 (1974); Patterson v. State, 133 Ga.App. 742, 212 S.E.2d 85......
-
Maddox v. State
...S.E.2d 629 (1983).1 Under these circumstances, the State may elect to prosecute the occupants jointly or separately ( Kennemore v. State, 222 Ga. 252, 149 S.E.2d 471 (1966)), or may elect to prosecute only one of the occupants for directly committing the crime, but nevertheless prove the so......