King v. State, 53395

Decision Date17 February 1977
Docket NumberNo. 2,No. 53395,53395,2
Citation233 S.E.2d 274,141 Ga.App. 316
PartiesF. L. KING v. The STATE
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

J. Robert Daniel, Macon, for appellant.

Walker P. Johnson, Dist. Atty., Thomas H. Hinson, Asst. Dist. Atty., Macon, for appellee.

SHULMAN, Judge.

Defendant was found in a church parking lot at 1:10 a. m. in his car with the motor running. A companion was with him. Certain items identified as property of the church were in the car. A pane of glass had been removed from the church window and putty had been scraped from around the pane. A knifeblade was found on the person of defendant. Upon conviction of burglary defendant appeals and enumerates error on the general grounds only.

In the case of Evans v. State, 138 Ga.App. 460, 226 S.E.2d 303 this court held: " 'Where stolen goods are found in the possession of the defendant charged with burglary, recently after the commission of the offense, that fact would authorize the jury to infer that the accused was guilty, unless he explained his possession to their satisfaction.' Mathews v. State, 103 Ga.App. 743, 120 S.E.2d 359; Floyd v. State, 137 Ga.App. 181, 223 S.E.2d 230. It was within the jury's province to believe that appellant's explanation of his possession advanced at trial was not a reasonable or satisfactory one. See Peacock v. State, 131 Ga.App. 651, 206 S.E.2d 582." Apparently in this case the jury did not believe that defendant's explanation of his possession was reasonable.

The evidence was sufficient to authorize the conviction.

Judgment affirmed.

QUILLIAN, P. J., and STOLZ, J., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Cosby v. State, 58339
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • October 10, 1979
    ...explanation of his possession advanced at trial was a reasonable or satisfactory one was a question for the jury. See King v. State, 141 Ga.App. 316, 317, 233 S.E.2d 274 and cits. The verdict returned in this case indicates that the jury did not believe that defendant's explanation of his p......
  • DeLoach v. State, 53967
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • June 28, 1977
    ...believe that appellant's explanation of his possession advanced at trial was not a reasonable or satisfactory one." King v. State, 141 Ga.App. 316, 317, 233 S.E.2d 274, 275. We find that the direct and circumstantial evidence, taken together, is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of Cod......
  • Arnold v. DeKalb County, 53391
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • February 17, 1977
    ... ... State, 131 Ga.App. 666, 206 S.E.2d 553 (1974). " 'A nunc pro tunc entry cannot supply non-action,' Sikes ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT