Paschal v. State, s. 27846
| Decision Date | 05 September 1973 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 27846,27847,s. 27846 |
| Citation | 199 S.E.2d 803,230 Ga. 859 |
| Parties | Warren Harding PASCHAL, Jr. v. The STATE. David Lee JACKSON v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Frank K. Martin, Columbus, for appellants.
Claude N. Morris, Dist. Atty., Americus, Dorothy T. Beasley, Asst. Atty. Gen., Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
These two appeals result from convictions in the trial court for armed robbery and criminal trespass to property in the second degree. The Appellants were tried together in one trial, each of them was convicted for having committed the two crimes charged, and both have appealed directly from the judgments of conviction.
1. The first enumerated error complains of a portion of the court's charge to the jury. The Court charged as follows: 'If you believe from all the evidence in the case that the defendants are guilty of the offense of armed robbery beyond a reasonable doubt, then it would be your duty to convict them, . . . If you believe from all the evidence in the case that the defendants are guilty of the offense of criminal damage to property in the second degree beyond a reasonable doubt then it would be your duty to convict them, . . .'
The appellants complain of the words 'duty to convict' in this portion of the charge.
This contention is without merit. If a unanimous jury, after having considered all of the evidence in the case, believes beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused parties are guilty of having committed the crimes charged, then the members of the jury do, pursuant to the law and the oaths taken as jurors, have a 'duty' to return verdicts of guilty. The use of the words 'duty to convict' in the context of the charge quoted above is not unfair, oppressive, or detrimental in any way to the accused.
2. The second enumerated error complains of the court's charge on the subject of alibi. A portion of the court's charge was as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Payne v. State
...argument to the contrary is at odds with the plain words charged and with this court's ruling on this same point in Paschal v. State, 230 Ga. 859, 860, 199 S.E.2d 803. Objection 1 is without merit because the use of the word 'defense' is drawn from our alibi statute on which the charge was ......
-
Mafnas v. State, 56867
...of the jury do, pursuant to the law and the oaths taken as jurors, have a 'duty' to return verdicts of guilty." Paschal v. State, 230 Ga. 859(1), 199 S.E.2d 803 (1973); Code § 59-709. Accordingly, the request to charge was inappropriate and it was not erroneous to refuse to give it. See als......
-
Smith v. State, 30348
...was almost identical to charges approved by this court in Payne v. State, 231 Ga. 755(2), 204 S.E.2d 128 (1974), and Paschal v. State, 230 Ga. 859(2), 199 S.E.2d 803 (1973). See in this connection the pattern charge on alibi expressly approved by this court in Patterson v. State, 233 Ga. 72......
-
Holsey v. State
...not err in its charge pertaining to alibi. The charge as given was substantially the same as approved by this court in Paschal v. State, 230 Ga. 859, 199 S.E.2d 803 and Payne v. State, 231 Ga, 755, 204 S.E.2d 128. See Patterson v. State, 233 Ga. 724, 213 S.E.2d 7. The appellant contends tha......