Salem v. State, 26691
| Decision Date | 08 October 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 26691,26691 |
| Citation | 228 Ga. 186,184 S.E.2d 650 |
| Parties | Michael Francis SALEM v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Sharpe, Sharpe, Hartley & Newton T. Malone Sharpe, Lyons, for appellant.
Robert W. Reynolds, Dist. Atty., Albany, Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Harold N. Hill, Jr., Executive Asst. Atty. Gen., Courtney Wilder Stanton, Dorothy T. Beasley, Asst. Attys. Gen., Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
The defendant was indicted, tried and convicted of two charges of robbery with an offensive weapon. A motion for new trial was thereafter overruled and the present appeal filed. Held:
1. One enumeration of error raises questions as to the validity of the indictments since they both allegedly grew out of the same transaction, to wit: robbery by use of an offensive weapon of two persons at the same time.
McGill v. State, 226 Ga. 802(1), 177 S.E.2d 675.
No question was raised prior to joining issue and this enumeration of error is without merit, but as to validity of multiple indictments under such circumstances see Gully v. State, 116 Ga. 527, 42 S.E. 790, and citations.
A motion to suppress certain evidence was made prior to trial and upon the hearing of such issue evidence was adduced that the defendant's automobile was being operated in Dade County, Florida when it was stopped as a result of a traffic violation and the operator (not the defendant) placed under arrest. The automobile did not have a valid inspection sticker and was impounded for such reason as well as because the non owner operator was arrested. Part of one of the fenders had been repainted and was a different finish from the remainder of the automobile. While the vehicle was impounded a visual examination of the exterior of the automobile disclosed the evidence that the repainted fender had 'pockmarks' and as a result part of the fender was removed. The evidence sought to be suppressed was the testimony with reference to the 'pockmarks' in the fender.
No contention is made that the arrest of the operator of the automobile was illegal or that the impounding was illegal. The evidence obtained was visible on the exterior of the automobile and the trial court did not err in overruling the motion to suppress such evidence. Compare Tanner v. State, 114 Ga.App. 35, 150 S.E.2d 189; Crider v. State, 114 Ga.App. 523, 151 S.E.2d 792, and citations.
Nor did the trial court err in admitting testimony with reference to such evidence on the trial of the case.
3. It is well settled that while evidence may be subject to objection yet if no objection is made in the trial court, or if the only objection made is not good, no reversible error is committed by the trial court in allowing the evidence to be submitted. See Hamilton v. State, 169 Ga. 613(1), 151 S.E. 17; Meeks v. Meeks, 209 Ga. 588(1), 74 S.E.2d 861.
Accordingly, those enumerations of error complaining of the admission of evidence...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. State, No. S03A0968.
...error to permit the indictment with the improper information written thereon to go to the jury room with the jury. Salem v. State, 228 Ga. 186(5), 184 S.E.2d 650 (1971). 3. In response to an outburst from the victim's sister, the trial court ordered a recess. In addition to the sister's out......
-
Larocque v. State
...S.E.2d 717 (1982). Appellant cannot enumerate as error the admission of evidence introduced without objection. Salem v. State, 228 Ga. 186, 187-188(3), 184 S.E.2d 650 (1971). It is necessary to object at the time it is actually offered, or it is waived. Curtis v. State, 212 Ga.App. 237, 239......
-
Byrd v. State
...always been the practice in this State to permit the jury to have in their room the indictment in a criminal case. Salem v. State, 228 Ga. 186, 188(5), 184 S.E.2d 650 (1971); Chandler v. State, 143 Ga.App. 608, 610(6), 239 S.E.2d 158 (1977). The names of the grand jurors are a part of the i......
-
Welch v. State
...376 (1976); Graham v. State, 236 Ga. 378, 223 S.E.2d 803 (1976); Walker v. State, 232 Ga. 33, 205 S.E. 260 (1974); Salem v. State, 228 Ga. 186, 184 S.E.2d 650 (1971). See also Milton v. Wainwright, 407 U.S. 371, 92 S.Ct. 2174, 33 L.Ed.2d 1 (1972), where the court found a constitutional erro......