Pontoon v. State
| Decision Date | 18 February 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 71339,71339 |
| Citation | 341 S.E.2d 505,177 Ga.App. 868 |
| Parties | PONTOON v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
David V. Weber, Augusta, for appellant.
Sam B. Sibley, Jr., Dist. Atty., Charles R. Sheppard, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Jimmy Fitzgerald Pontoon appeals from his conviction of rape.
1. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in granting over his objection the jury's request during deliberations to hear a tape recording of the victim's testimony. He urges this court to adopt a stricter standard requiring that when a jury is permitted to rehear testimony the trial court must either give a cautionary instruction, specifically inquire whether the jury also wishes to rehear any additional testimony, or conduct an independent or in-camera inspection of the entire record to ensure that there is no confusion or conflict, in order to minimize the possibility of a jury assigning any undue weight or influence to the reheard testimony.
Johns v. State, 239 Ga. 681, 683, 238 S.E.2d 372 (1977). Harris v. State, 173 Ga.App. 787, 789, 328 S.E.2d 370 (1985). "While [some] later cases approve of cautionary instructions they do not demand that [they] be given so as to require reversal in the event such instructions are not given." Walker v. State, 170 Ga.App. 82, 84, 316 S.E.2d 544 (1984). Our review of the victim's testimony discloses no special circumstances which might work an injustice or require reversal, and we decline to deviate from the well-established standards now in effect.
2. Appellant asserts that the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial based on the ground that at trial the State had in its possession exculpatory material which was not disclosed to him until after the trial and sentencing. This evidence consisted of "seven latent lift cards" listed in a report issued a week prior to trial by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, Division of Forensic Sciences, along with sealed rape evidence kits containing items identified as coming from the victim and the suspect and articles of the victim's clothing. Although appellant filed timely motions seeking discovery of scientific reports and exculpatory material, the State failed to disclose the existence of these fingerprints, which were never tested, prior to trial. Indeed, the investigating detective stated at trial that he had not then received any results from the examination by the crime lab of the physical evidence he had gathered at the scene of the crime, and thus nothing from the report was introduced in evidence.
As pointed out by appellant, in determining whether the State's failure to disclose evidence to the defense denied the defendant a fair trial, the proper standard of the materiality of undisclosed evidence is that if the omitted evidence creates a reasonable doubt of guilt which did not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Green v. State
... ... There was, however, no prior objection to the testimony in question, nor was any motion made to strike it. The remedy for a violation of OCGA § 17-7-211 is the exclusion of the evidence rather than the grant of a mistrial. Pontoon v. State, 177 Ga.App. 868, 870, 341 ... S.E.2d 505 (1986). Thus, in the absence of any objection to or motion to strike the testimony, the refusal to grant a mistrial was proper. In any event, the admission of this testimony was clearly harmless, since it was merely cumulative of the testimony ... ...
-
Stephens v. State
...is not required to give a cautionary instruction. See Lee v. State, 259 Ga. 230, 232(4), 378 S.E.2d 855 (1989); Pontoon v. State, 177 Ga.App. 868(1), 341 S.E.2d 505 (1986). We find no abuse of discretion in the instant 5. Stephens also contends § 16-13-30(d) is unconstitutional in that the ......
-
Bolick v. State, A00A1532.
...The State's affirmative duty to disclose does not attach, however, unless the evidence is "clearly exculpatory." Pontoon v. State, 177 Ga.App. 868, 341 S.E.2d 505 (1986). In this case, the State could hardly have been charged with recognizing the evidence at issue, which involved specific d......
-
Little v. State, No. A02A1990.
...903(2), 525 S.E.2d 728 (1999). 12. See id.; Williams v. State, 205 Ga.App. 445-446(2), 422 S.E.2d 309 (1992); Pontoon v. State, 177 Ga.App. 868-869(1), 341 S.E.2d 505 (1986). 13. (Punctuation omitted.) Thomas v. State, 256 Ga.App. 712, 714(2), 569 S.E.2d 620 14. Crowe v. State, 265 Ga. 582,......