Martin v. The State Of Ga.

Decision Date31 December 1868
Citation38 Ga. 293
PartiesJAMES MARTIN et al., plaintiffs in error. v. THE STATE OF GEORGIA, defendant in error.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Burglary. Motion for new trial. Decided by Judge Worrill. Muscogee Superior Court. May Term, 1868.

James Martin and Paul Key, two negroes, were indicted for breaking and entering the store-house of James Bradford, in March, 1868, in the night time, with intent to steal therefrom, etc. They were tried and found guilty, with a recommendation, by the jury, that they be imprisoned in the penitentiary for life. Their attorney moved for a new trial, upon the ground that said verdict was contrary to law, and not warranted by the testimony. The motion was overruled, and the prisoners were sentenced to hard labor in the penitentiary for and during their natural lives. Thereupon, a writ of error was sued out, upon the ground that the Court erred in refusing a new trial.

The evidence showed that the store-house was broken, as charged. The hinges of the window were broken off with anaxe. The money-drawer, containing three dollars and a half, was moved from its place.

The question was, who did this wrong? The evidence to show that the defendants were the perpetrators was as follows: The owner of the store-house testified, that he saw Martin at his store-house, just before he closed it, on the evening of the burglary. Americus McDonald, a negro, testified, that he found out next morning that said burglary had *been committed; that between eight and nine o'clock, on the night of the breaking, he passed by the store-house, and saw Martin and a white boy sitting on a bench, in front of it. The owner was counting his money. The witness asked Martin what he was doing there at that time of the night. About an hour later, witness passed them again, and saw the white boy on said bench, and, as he passed the gate, he looked in at a hole and saw Martin in the back yard of the store-house.

Fanny Bell, a negro, testified, that at the time of the burglary, she lived on an alley back of "The Muscogee Home;" that about half after twelve o'clock that night, she saw Martin at said storehouse; that about fifteen minutes before that, Paul Key and Martin came to her house, and told a negro, named Sarah, not to go into the street that night, because the Marshal was waiting for her; that in a little while she, witness, went out into the street to look for the Marshal, and saw no one.

Robert Wood testified, that about midnight, on said night, he went to the house of Jim McHenry, because of a family quarrel there, and there saw Martin; that he went to the corner of "The Muscogee Home, " and there saw Paul Key, that about two o'clock, he came to Gunby's old corner, (the moon was shining brightly,) looked towards Tim Markham's, and saw some one sitting on the platform in front of the store; that he walked down, and when opposite to him, rose up and gave a signal; that, at that moment, he looked towards the said store-house, and saw a man coming from the corner, running; the man moved rather in a circle, and went to the door of "The Muscogee Home;" witness went to him; he had his hat down over his face; witness said, "Jim, what are you doing here?" He said he "was waiting for a gal." All the while witness was looking towards said storehouse, and saw some one leave said bench or watermelon stand, and go across the street; witness headed him off; it was Paul Key; shortly afterwards witness noticed that said window wasopen; went to the window, put his hand in at it, and found a money-drawer; it occurred to him that Martin *and Key were the guilty parties; witness started immediately, and as he did, Martin left "The Muscogee Home, " and Key left the corner at Dr. Grimes\'s; he started after them; they ran, and got together at Gunby\'s corner; he pursued them into an alley and lost them; about an hour later he arrested Martin, and about two hours later, he arrested Key; he examined them carefully, and found in Martin\'s pocket...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • McGuire v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • July 16, 1993
    ...a charge on circumstantial evidence where the State's case depends entirely upon circumstantial evidence, derived from Martin v. State of Ga., 38 Ga. 293 (1868); Carter v. State, 46 Ga. 637 (1872); and Simmons v. State, 85 Ga. 224, 11 S.E. 555 (1890), which were such Based upon the three ca......
  • Mims v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • July 16, 1993
    ...a charge on circumstantial evidence where the state's case depends entirely upon circumstantial evidence, derived from Martin v. State, 38 Ga. 293 (1868); Carter v. State, 46 Ga. 637 (1872); and Simmons v. State, 85 Ga. 224, 11 S.E. 555 (1890), which were such Based upon the three cases fro......
  • McChargue v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • July 16, 1993
    ...a charge on circumstantial evidence where the state's case depends entirely upon circumstantial evidence, derived from Martin v. State, 38 Ga. 293 (1868); Carter v. State, 46 Ga. 637 (1872); and Simmons v. State, 85 Ga. 224, 11 S.E. 555 (1890), which were such 2. If the evidence of the defe......
  • Johnson v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • July 16, 1993
    ...a charge on circumstantial evidence where the state's case depends entirely upon circumstantial evidence, derived from Martin v. State, 38 Ga. 293 (1868); Carter v. State, 46 Ga. 637 (1872); and Simmons v. State, 85 Ga. 224, 11 S.E. 555 (1890), which were such cases. Based upon the three ca......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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