McAllister v. State, 28346
| Decision Date | 08 November 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 28346,28346 |
| Citation | 231 Ga. 368,202 S.E.2d 54 |
| Parties | Eugene K. McALLISTER v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Philip S. Davi, Atlanta, for appellant.
Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., James H. Mobley, Jr., Morris H. Rosenberg, Carter Goode, Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Courtney Wilder Stanton, B. Dean Grindle, Jr., Deputy Asst. Attys. Gen., Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
Eugene K. McAllister was indicted, tried and convicted for two counts of armed robbery. His amended motion for new trial was overruled and the present appeal filed. Enumerated as error is the failure of the evidence to support the verdict beyond a reasonable doubt, the admission of evidence, the lack of effective assistance of counsel, and improper argument of counsel for the state. Held:
1. It is well settled that an objection to the admission of evidence may not be raised for the first time on appeal. See Clenney v. State, 229 Ga. 561(3), 192 S.E.2d 907. Nor may an objection be raised on appeal where no objection was made during the trial to argument of counsel. See Hart v. State, 227 Ga. 171(3), 179 S.E.2d 346, and citations. Accordingly, neither of these enumerations of error presents any question for review. However, a review of the record discloses that the evidence referred to in the enumerated error was admissible as original evidence to explain conduct and comes within an exception to the hearsay rule (Code § 38-302; Estes v. State, 224 Ga. 687, 164 S.E.2d 108), and the argument made by the prosecuting attorney was not subject to objection.
2. While another attorney may have selected trial tactics different from those used by the attorney who represented the defendant in the trial court, it cannot be said that such attorney's representation of the defendant was such as to render such representation incompetent or ineffective. See Hart v. State, supra, and citations. Moreover, a review of the transcript shows a vigorous representation by trial counsel.
3. The evidence adduced by the state, including that of eyewitnesses, authorized the conviction of the defendant for the offenses of armed robbery, and the judgment of the trial court overruling the defendant's motion for new trial must be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur, except INGRAM, J., who concurs in the judgment only.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Spivey v. State
...435(2), 67 S.E.2d 221 (1951). Objections to argument ordinarily can not be raised for the first time after trial. McAllister v. State, 231 Ga. 368(1), 202 S.E.2d 54 (1973); Scott v. State, 229 Ga. 541(6), 192 S.E.2d 367 (1972). In a death penalty case, however, we must review the entire rec......
-
Cargill v. State
...435 (2), (67 SE2d 221) (1951). Objections to argument ordinarily cannot be raised for the first time after trial. McAllister v. State, 231 Ga. 368 (1) (202 SE2d 54) (1973); Scott v. State, 229 Ga. 541(6) (192 SE2d 367) (1972). In a death penalty case, however, we must review the record to d......
-
Gilreath v. State
...case, these enumerations of error would present nothing for review since no objection to these remarks was made. McAllister v. State, 231 Ga. 368(1), 202 S.E.2d 54 (1973); Scott v. State, 229 Ga. 541(6), 192 S.E.2d 367 (1972). Because this is a death penalty case, and the allegedly improper......
-
Alderman v. State
..."It is well settled that an objection to the admission of evidence may not be raised for the first time on appeal." McAllister v. State, 231 Ga. 368, 202 S.E.2d 54 (1973). The Georgia contemporaneous objection rule is based upon both court rule (Code Ann. § 24-3362) and case law. Andrews v.......