Richards v. State
Decision Date | 14 March 1911 |
Citation | 70 S.E. 868,136 Ga. 67 |
Parties | RICHARDS. v. STATE. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Under the evidence submitted by the state on the trial, the killing of the decedent by the accused was murder, and there was no evidence to authorize the jury to find the defendant guilty of the crime of involuntary manslaughter in the commission of an unlawful act. Consequently the court did not err in failing to charge the jury upon that grade of homicide, even if such a charge would have been authorized under the statement made by the accused; there being no written request made for a charge upon that subject.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 615, 651; Dec. Dig. § 824.*]
The verdict in this case was received and published in open court in the absence of defendant's counsel, and one ground of the motion for a new trial complains of the reception of the verdict under these circumstances. It appears from a note by the court, relative to this ground, that before counsel for the accused left the courtroom he was informed by the court Held that, under the foregoing facts and circumstances, the refusal to grant a new trial on the ground of the absence of defendant's counsel at the time of the reception of the verdict was not error. Roberson v. State, 70 S. E. 175.
[Ed. Note, —For other cases, see Criminal Law. Cent. Dig. §§ 1496-1506; Dec. Dig. § 641.*]
Nor was the verdict vitiated by the fact that at the time of its reception in open court the clerk of the court was absent, and "the court ordered the solicitor general to take charge of the indictment and verdict, and on the following morning, and in the presence of the court, the same was handed to the clerk." Robinson v. State, 128 Ga. 254, 57 S. E. 315.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 2082, 2083;...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Brown v. State
...... . . The. right of the accused to have his counsel present during the. entire trial of his case has been recognized by this court in. a number of other cases. Smith v. State, 60 Ga. 430;. Lassiter v. State, 67 Ga. 739; Roberson v. State, 135 Ga. 654, 70 S.E. 175; Richards v. State, 136 Ga. 67, 70 S.E. 868; Baldwin v. State, 138 Ga. 349, 75 S.E. 324. But in these cases new. trials were not granted, under the special facts involved. In. O'Bannon v. State, 76 Ga. 29, it was broadly. held:. . . "There was no error in receiving the verdict in the. absence of the ......
- Parker v. State
-
Warren v. State
...counsel at the time of the reception of the verdict was not error. Roberson v. State, 135 Ga. 654, 70 S. E. 175; Richards v. State, 136 Ga. 67, 70 S. E. 868." The case of Roberson v. State, supra, is very close in point, and supports the court in the conclusion announced above. It is stated......
-
Brown v. State
...of other cases. Smith v. State, GO Ga. 430; Lassiter v. State, 67 Ga. 739; Roberson v. State, 135 Ga. 654, 70 S. E. 175; Richards v. State, 136 Ga. 67, 70 S. E. 868; Baldwin v. State, 138 Ga. 349, 75 S. E. 324. But in these cases new trials were not granted, under the special facts involved......