King v. State
| Citation | 173 S.E.2d 746,121 Ga.App. 347 |
| Decision Date | 06 March 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 45140,No. 2,45140,2 |
| Parties | David E. KING v. The STATE |
| Court | United States Court of Appeals (Georgia) |
John Kirby, Andrew A. Smith, Atlanta, for appellant.
Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., Carter Goode, Tony H. Hight, Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opnion by the Court
Appellant and another were indicted for assault with intent to murder in that they 'did unlawfully, with malice aforethought, assault, cut, stab and wound one Dwight Pledger with a knife, and did assault, strike and beat the said Pledger with their hands and fists, the said knife and the hands and fists of the accused when used in said manner, being weapons likely to produce death.' King was convicted and now appeals from the denial of his amended motion for new trial. Held:
1. The general grounds are without merit.
2. A request to charge that 'hands and fists are not per se deadly weapons, and unless you believe beyond a reasonable doubt that these defendants used their hands and fists in a manner likely to produce death, with the intent then and there to kill, you would not be authorized to find the defendants guilty,' was properly denied because it was not adjusted to the evidence. It omits all reference to the knife mentioned in the indictment and, according to the testimony of Dr. Dayer, the attending physician, the prosecutor was stabbed eight times-four in the stomach, once in the back, once in the left arm and twice in the other-the wounds having been made by 'a knife or a sharp instrument.' The request must be abstractly correct, pertinent and adjusted to the evidence. Bullington v. Chandler, 110 Ga.App. 803(2), 140 S.E.2d 59; Bassett v. State, 119 Ga.App. 639(2), 168 S.E.2d 343.
2. The enumeration assigning error upon a questioning of the defendant who testified under oath (two questions by the court) and a witness who was on cross examination (a total of 41 questions, asked intermittently through the examination) is without merit. The only limitation on the right of the judge to interrogate parties of witnesses who testify is that he shall not express an opinion as to what has or has not been proved. Parker v. State, 51 Ga.App. 295(2), 180 S.E. 390. An examination of the several interrogations by the court reveals no expression of opinion. Moreover, there was no objection or motion for mistrial on the basis of the court's questioning, and no error could be shown. Moore v. McAfee, 151 Ga. 270, 106 S.E. 274; Cline...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sawyer v. Citizens and Southern Nat. Bank
......§ 81A-108)." Hall v. First National . Page 138. Bank of Atlanta, 145 Ga.App. 267, 269, 243 S.E.2d 569 (1978). See Phillips v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 121 Ga.App. 343, 345(2), 173 S.E.2d 723 (1970). Sawyer's reliance on Carmichael v. Guenette, 61 Ga.App. 460, 6 ......
- Phillips v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
-
Pittman v. State, 50029
...was made below, and these enumerations are without merit. Cline v. State, 49 Ga.App. 16, 17(2), 174 S.E. 194; King v. State, 121 Ga.App. 347, 348(3), 173 S.E.2d 746. 6. Enumerations of error 4, 5, 10, 15 and 22 complain of the admission of evidence. However, Pittman's counsel did not object......
-
Winget v. State
...stronger (T. 24). These alleged errors cannot be considered. See Spencer v. State, 231 Ga. 705, 707, 203 S.E.2d 856; King v. State, 121 Ga.App. 347, 348(3), 173 S.E.2d 746; Joyner v. State, 208 Ga. 435(2), 67 S.E.2d 221. 10. The court did not err in charging the jury that the defense of ali......