Pulliam v. State

• Decision Date: 07 September 1945
• Docket Number: 15237.
• Citation: 35 S.E.2d 250,199 Ga. 709
• Parties: PULLIAM v. STATE.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

35 S.E.2d 250

199 Ga. 709

PULLIAM v. STATE.

No. 15237.

Supreme Court of Georgia

September 7, 1945

Syllabus by the Court.

1. An extraordinary motion for new trial upon grounds of newly discovered evidence is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge, and a refusal to grant the motion will not be reversed unless his discretion is abused. If it is not reasonably apparent to the judicial mind that the new facts would probably produce a different verdict, a new trial should not be ordered.

2. In a trial for murder where, as a motive, the State introduces testimony that the accused was the beneficiary of certain life-insurance policies on the lives of parties killed by the act for which he was being tried, and from which policies he would receive the proceeds; and where subsequently to the trial, suit is brought upon the policies by the accused, and he then learns that the policies were not enforceable contracts at the time of the homicide, and where he then files an extraordinary motion for new trial based upon the newly discovered evidence of the non-existence of any life insurance, and in said motion there is no evidence that would establish knowledge of the accused at the time of the homicide that the insurance policies were not enforceable such evidence would not be sufficient to authorize this court to hold that the trial judge abused his discretion in overruling the extraordinary motion for new trial.

(a) The question of the presence or absence of motive is not necessarily determined by the jury on the correctness of conclusions drawn by the accused from a state of facts, but the jury may ascribe as a motive for a crime a belief or conclusion which is erroneous and based upon his misconception of facts.

This case alleges error in the refusal to grant an extraordinary motion for new trial. At the February, 1943, term of Murray superior court the accused was convicted of the murder of his wife. The charge was that she was killed by cutting her with an instrument, and by setting fire to and burning the dwelling house in which she was an occupant. After the fire the bodies of his wife and his five children were found largely consumed by fire. The conviction was affirmed by this court in Pulliam v. State, 196 Ga. 782, 28 S.E.2d 139, and a summary of the evidence upon which the conviction was based will be found there.

At the February, 1945, term of said court the accused filed an extraordinary motion for new trial in which it is alleged that since the trial two grounds have been discovered by reason of which a new trial should be granted. Ground one asserts that a certain letter which would have been evidence in his behalf was taken from his person when arrested and was withheld from him by the State until after his trial. Ground two is based upon evidence adduced upon the trial to the effect that as a motive for the crime the accused would collect $2400 insurance; and that since said trial it has developed that the insurance policies referred to were not enforceable contracts. Some more detailed evidence relating to both grounds will be stated in the opinion.

C. H Dalton, of Dalton, for plaintiff in error.

J. H Paschall, Sol. Gen., of Calhoun, T. Grady Head, Atty. Gen., and L. C. Groves, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.

ATKINSON, Justice (after stating the foregoing facts).

1. In the first ground of the motion it is set out that, on Friday before the fire on Monday, J. C. Kay, the sheriff of Gordon County, had delivered to the accused the following letter 'Mark: Arthur Washington, a negro swore a warrant out for you about an automobile wreck. Bring someone to sign your bond. Don't think it will amount to anything. Coley.' This letter was taken from him by someone from the State investigator's office whose name he did not know, after he had been taken to the jail in Atlanta, and he could never locate the letter or anyone who knew anything about it until after the trial. Subsequently the letter was located in the files of S.W. Roper, an investigator for the State. It is insisted by the accused that, having located this letter, it is newly discovered evidence that will require the grant of a new trial, for the reason that it will be used to explain certain damaging testimony used against him on his trial. He asserts that the evidence showed that, when he was arrested while working at a sawmill several miles from his home, he inquired of the sheriff making the arrest why he was being arrested, to which the sheriff answered, 'Your home was burned and some of your folks,' to which the accused made no reply and asked no questions. And on the way...