Ridley v. State
| Decision Date | 02 February 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 30426,30426 |
| Citation | 236 Ga. 147,223 S.E.2d 131 |
| Parties | George RIDLEY v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Robert M. Coker, Atlanta, for appellant.
Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Harrison Kohler, Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., Charles C. Smith, Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty., Atlanta, for appellee.
Defendant appeals from jury verdicts of guilty of two counts of armed robbery, and two eight-year concurrent sentences imposed by the court.
On February 14, 1975, Ms. Dille was working in a booth at an Apcoa parking lot when she was approached at 12:15 p.m. by a man wearing a flowered shirt who asked for a coathanger (for use by customers who lock their keys in their cars). When she turned to look for one, the man pulled a pistol and held it to her side. He took $25 and left. She reported the robbery by calling the Apcoa office.
At 3:45 p.m. that afternoon Ms. Derricho, an employee of another Apcoa parking lot, was approached by a man wearing a flowered shirt who asked for a coathanger. When she told him she did not have one, he went to a nearby laundry. He returned in a few minutes to ask if she had a phone to call a locksmith. When she said her phone only called her office, he pulled a pistol and pointed it at her side. While the defendant was standing near Ms. Derricho's booth, Mr. Burgess, an employee at a four story parking garage next to the lot, became suspicious. Mr. Burgess took a pistol, went to the top of the garage, observed that the defendant had a gun on Ms. Derricho and was scooping up money with the other hand. Mr. Burgess told the robber to drop his pistol and lay down. The robber was held there until police arrived.
A detective who answered the call identified the defendant as the man who was arrested at the scene. Ms. Dille identified the defendant from photos, in a lineup, and in court as the man who had robbed her earlier that day. Ms. Derricho and Mr. Burgess also made in-court identifications of the defendant as the robber.
The defendant's defense as to the first robbery was alibi. His mother testified that he was at home (located about four or five blocks away from the robberies) when she arrived home at 1 p.m. and that he stayed there until 2:30 p.m. Two persons testified as to the defendant's good reputation in the community.
The defendant testified that he was at home at the time of the first robbery. Regarding the second robbery, he testified that he carried a box of candles for a woman whose car was parked at the lot. He said that he was leaving to catch his bus when someone ordered him to lie down on the ground. According to the defendant's testimony, the pistol belonged to the woman employee at the parking lot and he never had a gun.
1. The defendant enumerates error in the denial of his motion for new trial on the grounds that the verdict is (a) contrary to the evidence and without evidence to support it, (b) decidedly and strongly against the weight of the evidence, and (c) contrary to the law and the principles of justice and equity. These are known as the 'general grounds' of a motion for new trial.
Because of the large number of cases reaching this court in which it is urged and strenuously argued that 'the verdict is decidedly and strongly against the weight of the evidence' (ground b above), we feel compelled to reiterate that this ground of the general grounds is addressed to the trial court alone, not an appellate court. If the trial judge overrules the general grounds, appellate courts consider only the sufficiency of the evidence (grounds a and c), not the weight of the evidence. The weight of the evidence was considered by the jury at the trial and by the trial judge in ruling upon the general grounds. Strong v. State, 232 Ga. 294, 298, 206 S.E.2d 461 (1974); Ingram v. State, 204 Ga. 164, 184, 48 S.E.2d 891 (1948); Seaboard Air-Line Ry. Co. v. Benton, 43 Ga.App. 495, 505, 159 S.E. 717 (1931).
Even...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tibbs v. Florida
...denied, 396 U.S. 864, 90 S.Ct. 140, 24 L.Ed.2d 117 (1969); Dorman v. State, 622 P.2d 448, 453-454 (Alaska 1981); Ridley v. State, 236 Ga. 147, 149, 223 S.E.2d 131, 132 (1976); State v. McGranahan, --- R.I. ---, ---, 415 A.2d 1298, 1301-1303 (1980); Tyacke v. State, 65 Wis.2d 513, 521, 223 N......
-
State v. Rosalie Grant, 90-LW-3786
... ... court to weigh the evidence. Jackson v ... Virginia (1979) , 443 U.S. 307, 319; United ... States v. Lincoln (C.A. 8, 1980), 630 F. 2d ... 1313, 1316; Dorman v. State (Alaska 1981), ... 622 P. 2d 448, 453; Ridley v. State (1976), ... 236 Ga. 147, 149, 223 S.E. 2d 131, 132, State v ... Sorgee (1978), 54 Ohio St. 2d 464 (8 0.0. 3d 4521; ... State v. Robinson (1955), 162 Ohio St. 486 ... (55 O.O. 3881." ... In ... State v. Scott (1986), 26 Ohio St ... ...
-
Green v. State
...828 (1977); Drake v. State, 241 Ga. 583, 247 S.E.2d 57 (1978); Bethay v. State, 235 Ga. 371, 219 S.E.2d 743 (1975); Ridley v. State, 236 Ga. 147, 223 S.E.2d 131 (1976). In making this determination we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict rendered and resolve all conf......
-
Stanley v. State
...against the weight of the evidence, and are contrary to law and the principles of justice and equity. In accord with Ridley v. State, 236 Ga. 147(1), 223 S.E.2d 131 (1976), Ingram v. State, 204 Ga. 164, 184, 48 S.E.2d 891 (1948), we find that the evidence was sufficient to authorize the jur......