Merritt v. State

Decision Date09 April 1940
Docket Number13196.
PartiesMERRITT v. STATE.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court.

The testimony of the alleged injured female, if credible, was sufficient to establish every material element of the crime of rape, with which the defendant was charged. By the Code, § 38-1806, the jury is made the sole judge of the credibility of this witness; and this court is a court for the correction of errors of law only (§ 2-3005). The evidence supported the verdict; and it was not error to overrule the motion for new trial, which was based upon the general grounds questioning the sufficiency of the evidence.

Roy Merritt was tried for the offense of rape, alleged to have been committed on the person of Eunice Maddox. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, without recommendation, and the defendant was given a death sentence. A motion for new trial was made on the general grounds that the verdict was contrary to law and the evidence, without evidence to support it, etc. No special grounds were added by amendment. The judge refused a new trial. The bill of exceptions assigns error on that judgment.

The evidence submitted at the trial, so far as necessary to be stated, is in substance as follows: Eunice Maddox, the alleged injured female, testified: She lives with her brother in Griffin, Spalding County, Georgia. On September 2, 1939 Wayne Askew, a brother in law of Roy Merritt, came to her home in the afternoon and asked her to go with him. She asked who was with him, and he answered, 'Roy,' whereupon she stated that she could not go. He then asked her to go out to the car, saying that Roy was going home. When she went to the car Roy and Bud Eubanks were there. Askew said Roy was going home, and the defendant got out of the car and stated that he was going to the circus, and told Askew to take Eubanks home. Witness then got in the car with Askew, and the defendant got back in the car. She tried to get out of the car, but they kept going and wouldn't let her out. They stopped at Tom Foster's place and got some whisky, and she was fixing to get out of the car there, but the defendant jumped in the front seat and told her she could not get out for it would cause trouble for all of them. They stopped at another filling-station to get some fruit juice to drink after the whisky. They went from there to Zebulon, took the Concord road, and, after crossing a bridge, turned off on a little road and parked. That was about 8:30 at night. The defendant told her to get in the back seat, and she refused. She got out of the car and ran up the road, but the defendant caught her and brought her back. She caught and held to the steering wheel, but he pulled her head back in his lap. She told him he was choking her, and he released her; and she hit him on the arm with a nail-file and tore his shirt. He slapped her in the face and she 'saw stars.' When she hit him back, he struck her with his fist and knocked her down. While this was happening, Askew and Eubanks were standing back of the car watching. The defendant had sexual intercourse with her. She kicked him, and he said, 'You kick me and I'll kill you.' She hit him, and he said, 'I will kill you, God damn you.' This was in Pike County Georgia. There was a house on top of the hill, about 300 yards from where the car stopped. She was in the back seat of the car when the defendant had connection with her. The defendant would not let her call and ask the other boys to help her, saying that he would kill her if she did. He did not put his hand over her mouth, but he told her to keep quiet, and she did not call because she was afraid of him. Finally, she got out of the car after the defendant had had intercourse with her and started up the road, but the defendant carried her back to the car; and every time she would run off he would catch her and bring her back. When the defendant got through with her, Askew asked them to leave, but Eubanks said he was not going until he had tried her out. She started to run, and Eubanks grabbed and put her over the fence roughly, and when she refused to lie down as he requested he laid her down on the ground and unfastened his clothes. She told him that if she lived to get home she would tell it. She asked the other boys to help but they refused. Eubanks tried to have intercourse with her, but failed. When he got through, she got back over the fence and told them to take her home. The defendant made her get in the back seat, and got in the back seat with her. They returned to Griffin, Spalding County, at about 10:30, and took Eubanks and Askew home. They came straight up Hill Street. A drug-store was open, and she saw a policeman on the corner, but she did not cry out, because 'Roy dared me to holler. He told me that I had better not holler.' Eubanks told her to lie down in the car so his wife couldn't see her, but she did not do it. When they had put Eubanks and Askew out of the car, leaving only witness and defendant in the car, the defendant drove out Hill Street to Dobbins' old mill, about where the houses stop. Roy Merritt had connection with her near Dobbins' mill. She got out of the car and got away from him, but he ran and caught her and carried her back to the car. The defendant had intercourse with her in the car five or six times. She is twenty-five years old, and the defendant is forty-two years old. She had known the defendant five or six years, and about two years before had gone to ride with the defendant, another girl, and Shorty Hopkins; but nothing improper was done at that time. After Roy Merritt got through with her, he carried her home and put her out in front of the house about twelve o'clock. Her body, arms, legs, and throat were bruised the next morning, and her throat and arms had fingerprints on them. Her private parts were sore the next morning. There were no fingerprints on her legs, but the defendant bit her on her leg. The defendant told her he would ruin her whole family, and threatened her life if she told what had happened, and she did not tell it until the next morning, when she told her sister-in-law and the chief of police, and went to see Dr. Griffin. When she left home that night she had on only stepins for underclothes, and the defendant pulled them off when he had intercourse with her. He pulled his pants off and put them back on, and then pulled them off and put them back on again on North Hill Street in Griffin, saying that he pulled them off because he would mess them up. She never put her stepins back on, because she never had a chance. The defendant had sexual intercourse with her both in Pike County and in Spalding County, against her will, by force, and without consent.

Mrs Cecil Maddox testified that her husband was a brother of Eunice Maddox, who lived with them; that on the morning of September 3, Eunice Maddox was bruised all over her neck, arms and legs, and stayed in bed several days before she could work; that she did not know what time Eunice came in the night before, and knew nothing of what had happened until the next morning; and that Eunice looked depressed, and, upon being asked what was the matter, related her experience of the night before, substantially as testified to on the trial by her, except that she did not mention about her experience with Eubanks for several days. Cecil Maddox testified to the bruises and signs on the body of Eunice Maddox. J. S. Harper, chief of police of Griffin, testified that Eunice Maddox's throat was bruised, that finger-prints were on her neck, that her arms and legs were bruised also, and that she was bruised all over very badly. Wayne Askew testified substantially as did Eunice Maddox, except that he said she made no complaint in his hearing during the entire time he was with her; that when the car stopped in Pike County, the defendant told him to get out, and Eubanks, using profanity, told him to get away from there, and he went a distance of 75 or 100 yards to the main road; that he returned to the car after about thirty minutes, and saw the defendant on top of Eunice Maddox in the back seat; that when they got through she asked him to help her find her key, and he turned on the light of the car and found the key; that on the way down there he told the defendant he thought it was agreed that he should have the car and the girl, and that defendant and Eubanks were to stay in Griffin; whereupon the defendant stated that he had been out with the girl before, and that he and Eubanks intended to take her out then; and that when they approached the home of Eubanks, Eubanks told Eunice Maddox to lie down in the back of the car so his wife would not see her, and she did...

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 cases
  • Mickle v. Moore
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • November 12, 1941
    ... ... It is not sufficient to urge ... grounds of objection for the first time in a motion for a new ... trial. Phillips v. State, 102 Ga. 594, 27 S.E. 699; ... Bourquin v. Bourquin, 110 Ga. 440, 35 S.E. 710; ... White v. State, 116 Ga. 573, 42 S.E. 751; Wynne ... v. State, ... declares: 'The credibility of a witness is a matter to be ... determined by the jury under proper instructions from the ... court.' See Merritt v. State, 190 Ga. 81, 8 ... S.E.2d 386. The verdict is ... ...
  • Davis v. State, 15664.
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • January 8, 1947
    ...v. Moses, 48 Ga. 120; Slaton v. Fowler, 124 Ga. 955, 53 S.E. 567; Houston v. State, 186 Ga. 141, 145, 197 S.E. 118; Merritt v. State, 190 Ga. 81, 8 S.E.2d 386; Holmes v. State, 194 Ga. 853; Cooper v. State, 197 Ga. 611, 612 (7), 30 S.E.2d 177. In the case of Davis v. State, 120 Ga. 433, 48 ......
  • Mickle v. Moore
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • November 12, 1941
    ..."The credibility of a witness is a matter to be determined by the jury under proper instructions from the court." See Merritt v. State, 190 Ga. 81, 8 S.E.2d 386. The verdict is supported by the evidence, and the general grounds of the motion are without merit. Judgment affirmed. All the Jus......
  • Wilson v. Pollard
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • April 9, 1940
    ... ... maintained for the benefit of those entitled to recover under ... the act. It is not contended that the general law of this ... State with reference to a temporary administrator withholds ... from him the [190 Ga. 77] right to maintain a suit in behalf ... of the estate which he ... ...
  • 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