Powell v. State
| Decision Date | 24 March 1905 |
| Parties | POWELL. v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
CREDIBILITY OP WITNESS — CONVICTION OF CRIME—IMPEACHMENT—INSTRUCTIONS —EXCEPTION.
1. Where a witness has been successfully impeached by any of the legal methods (that is, where his unworthiness of credit has been absolutely established in the minds of the jury), he ought not to be believed, unless corroborated; it being, of course, always a matter for the jury to determine whether a witness has been really so impeached. Smith v. State, 35 S. E. 59, 109 Ga. 479; Holston v. Southern Ry. Co., 43 S. E. 29, 116 Ga. 656.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 14, Cent. Dig. Criminal Law, § 1252.]
2. The fact that a witness has been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude may be considered in determining his credibility. Shaw v. State, 29 S. E. 477, 102 Ga. 660.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 50, Cent. Dig. Witnesses, §§ 1127, 1161.]
3. The instructions to the jury, of which complaint is made in the present case, were in substantial accordance with the rules above announced.
4. Where evidence was introduced by the state for the purpose of impeaching the witnesses who testified in behalf of the accused, it was not error for the court, in connection with the instructions on the law of impeachment of witnesses, to say to the jury that the state insisted that the witnesses for the accused had been impeached.
5. It has been frequently ruled that an exception to an entire charge will not be considered unless the whole charge be subject to such exception. McLendon v. Frost, 57 Ga. 448, 450 (12); Anderson v. Southern Ry. Co., 33 S. E. 644, 107 Ga. 500; Newman v. Day, 34 S. E. 167, 108 Ga. 813.
6. It is well settled that a new trial will not be granted for newly discovered evidence which tends merely to impeach a witness.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 15, Cent. Dig. Criminal Law, §§ 2331, 2332.]
7. The evidence warranted the verdict, and the court did not err in refusing a new trial.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from Superior Court, Dougherty County; W. N. Spence, Judge.
Whitley Powell was convicted of crime, and brings error. Affirmed.
Walters & Walters, for plaintiff in error.
Arnold & Arnold and W. E. Wooten, Sol Gen., for the State.
FISH, P. J. Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Haynes v. Phillips
...109 Ga. 479, 35 S.E. 59; Holston v. Southern R. Co., 116 Ga. 656, 43 S.E. 29; Landers v. State, 149 Ga. 482, 100 S.E. 569; Powell v. State, 122 Ga. 571, 50 S.E. 369; Nipper v. Minix, 50 Ga.App. 51 (53), 176 S.E. 890; Bart v. Scheider, 39 Ga.App. 467 (471), 147 S.E. 430. If there is anything......
- Red Cypress Lumber Co v. Beall
-
Beach v. State
...While a witness may be discredited by proper proof that he has been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude (Powell v. State, 122 Ga. 571, 50 S. E. 369), it is not competent to discredit him by showing that he has been simply indicted for such an offense (Slappey v. Sumner, 136 Ga. 6......
-
Red Cypress Lumber Co. v. Beall
... ... Mann & Milner, for defendant in error ... POWELL, ... The ... view we take of the controlling questions in the case renders ... it necessary to state only the following portions ... ...