Neal v. State, 62905
| Decision Date | 26 January 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 62905,62905 |
| Parties | NEAL v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
James W. Purcell, Augusta, for appellant.
Sam B. Sibley, Jr., Dist. Atty., Charles R. Sheppard, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Neal was convicted of armed robbery. On appeal, he contends the trial court erred (1) by allowing a co-defendant's plea of guilty to be entered in the presence of the entire jury panel from which appellant's jury would be selected; (2) by shifting the burden of proof to appellant by charging the jury that the acts of a person of sound mind and discretion are presumed to be the product of that person's will, and that the natural and probable consequences of acts are presumed to be intended; and (3) by refusing to give one of appellant's requested charges.
1. It is unclear from the transcript whether appellant's co-defendant had actually entered a plea of guilty in front of members of the jury trying appellant. However, even assuming that such a procedure was followed, the statement by appellant's counsel that for the record he wanted to object to such a procedure did not invoke a ruling by the court. Not only must an objection be made, but a ruling must be obtained thereon for this court to review an alleged error. If no ruling is ever made on an objection, it is deemed waived. International etc. Local 387 v. Moore, 149 Ga.App. 431, 434(7), 254 S.E.2d 438 (1979). Further, since no motion for a mistrial was made, this enumeration of error raises no question for consideration by this court. Askea v. State, 153 Ga.App. 849, 852(4), 267 S.E.2d 279 (1980).
Finally, there is nothing in the record to support appellant's contention that a co-defendant's plea of guilty was entered in the presence of the jury panel except defense counsel's statement that for the record, he wanted to object to such a procedure. There is nothing in the transcript to indicate that such a procedure occurred. Our Supreme Court has held that where the transcript or record does not fully disclose what transpired at trial, the burden is on the complaining party to have the record completed in the trial court pursuant to the provisions of Ga.Code § 6-805(f). Where this is not done, there is nothing for an appellate court to review. Zachary v. State, 245 Ga. 2, 4, 262 S.E.2d 779 (1980).
2. Appellant's second enumeration of error has been decided adversely to his contention in Skrine v. State, 244 Ga. 520, 260 S.E.2d 900 (1979). See also, Peterson v. State, 158 Ga.App. 195(2), 279 S.E.2d 493 (1981).
3. Appellant contends that because the evidence was all circumstantial, the trial court erred by refusing his request to charge as follows: "I charge you, 'Where the facts in evidence and all reasonable deductions therefrom present two theories, one of guilt and the other consistent with...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gonzalez v. State
...the motion to invoke the rule of sequestration. A ruling must be obtained for this court to review an alleged error. Neal v. State, 161 Ga.App. 77(1), 289 S.E.2d 293 (1982). Assuming the judge's remark constituted denial of the motion to invoke the rule of sequestration, appellant's counsel......
-
Lee v. State, 66027
...is not a part of the record in this case. Therefore, there is nothing which this court can review concerning this issue. Neal v. State, 161 Ga.App. 77(1), 289 S.E.2d 293. Further, this evidence would be merely impeaching and may not be used as the basis for a new trial on the ground of newl......
-
Johnson v. State, 67538
...was not ruled upon, in which event the objection is deemed waived. Sprague v. State, 147 Ga.App. 347(3), 248 S.E.2d 711; Neal v. State, 161 Ga.App. 77(1), 289 S.E.2d 293. 6. There was no harmful error in the initial exclusion of certain testimony from two witnesses as the information desire......
-
Jackson v. State, 66270
...burden is on the complaining party to show error from the transcript and the record there is no merit in this claim. See Neal v. State, 161 Ga.App. 77(1), 289 S.E.2d 293; Zachary v. State, 245 Ga. 2, 4, 262 S.E.2d 779; Young v. State, 144 Ga.App. 712(1), 242 S.E.2d 351; Williams v. State, 1......