Smith v. State
| Decision Date | 14 May 1906 |
| Citation | 125 Ga. 296,54 S.E. 127 |
| Parties | SMITH. v. STATE |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Criminal Law—Instructions—Reasonable Doubt—Circumstantial Evidence—Confession —Corroboration.
In the trial of a criminal case, where the state relies for conviction both upon circumstantial evidence and upon direct evidence consisting of an alleged confession of defendant, and where the court charged, "Whether dependent upon positive or circumstantial evidence, the true question in all criminal cases is, not whether it be possible that the conclusion at which the testimony points may be false, but whether there is sufficient testimony to satisfy the mind and conscience beyond a reasonable doubt, " such charge was not rendered erroneous because of the failure of the court to go further and charge the law of circumstantial evidence.
(a) It was not erroneous, under evidence such as that mentioned above, for the court, in the absence of a timely and appropriate request, to omit to charge unqualifiedly upon the law of circumstantial evidence.
(b) Nor was it erroneous for the court, in the absence of such request, to omit to charge the law of circumstantial evidence, to be applied in the event the jury should not believe that the confession had been made.
(c) The confession was sufficiently corroborated, and, there being evidence to support the verdict, we will not disturb the judgment of the trial court in refusing to grant a new trial.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 14, Cent. Dig. Criminal Law, §§ 1883, 1996.]
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from Superior Court, Oglethorpe County; H. M. Holden, Judge.
Bryant Smith was convicted of arson, and brings error. Affirmed.
J. T. Pittard owned a ginhouse, which was burned about 4 o'clock on the morning of September 26, 1903, during the ginning season. The seedhouse was about 25 feet from the ginhouse. Connecting the two was a wooden structure, a little house sufficiently high from the ground to enable wagons to pass under it for loading and unloading, and upon which were two flues for letting the seed out and taking them In from the wagons. This structure is referred to as the "seedbin." It contained lint cotton and other highly inflammable material. At the close of the previous day's work there was no fire about the premises, except in the furnace, in the boiler room, which stood on the opposite side of the ginhouse, 90 feet away from the seedbin and seedhouse. At the close of the day's work, previous to the fire, there was near this seedbin a high trestle bench, such as plasterers use. Neely Jackson, a colored woman, lived about 100 yards from the gin. There were a number of other residences near by, among them that of Matthews, where Waggoner, the gin overseer, boarded, 150 yards away, and Arthur McWilliams, whose house was about 100 yards away and near that of Neely Jackson. Andrew Harris was an employé, who was permitted to sleep about on the porch of Mr. Pittard and in the ginhouse, and was expected to act as watchman around the ginhouse. He testified that about 12 o'clock on the night of the fire, while on watch, he heard a noise emanating from the direction of the seedbin, which "sounded like a rat knawing or somebody whittling." About this time a dog passed where he was standing at the front of the ginhouse, and he jumped at the dog, making a noise. Then the defendant came from the place where the whittling sound was heard, and was hailed by him several times before he answered, but finally said, "It is nobody to hurt you." Harris followed defendant as far as the well, and saw him go into the house of Neely Jackson. After he was gone, Harris went to where he had heard the whittling noise, and there found a fat slab about five feet long, which had not been there in the evening, standing against the wall of the seedbin, and fat shavings therefrom on the ground. The trestle bench was under the wall of the seedbin. Neither the shavings nor the bench were there at the close of the previous day's work. Arthur McWilliams testified that about 3 o'clock of the same night he heard the defendant in Neely Jackson's house, when she called him to get up, and that he then asked her for the matches....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sutton v. State
...of an appropriate request, it was not erroneous for the court to omit to charge the law of circumstantial evidence." Smith v. State, 125 Ga. 296, 299, 54 S.E. 127. also, McElroy v. State, 125 Ga. 37, 40, 53 S.E. 759; Owens v. State, 120 Ga. 296, 299, 48 S.E. 21; Eberhart v. State, 47 Ga. 59......
-
Brown v. State
... ... The confession being direct ... evidence, the conviction did not depend exclusively upon ... circumstantial evidence; and therefore, in the absence of an ... appropriate request, it was not erroneous for the court to ... omit to charge the law of circumstantial evidence. Smith ... v. State, 125 Ga. 296, 299, 54 S.E. 127. See also, ... Pressley v. State, supra ... 'A ... conviction may be lawfully had upon a free and voluntary ... confession, though the same be not otherwise corroborated ... than by proof of the corpus delicti.' Wimberly v ... ...
-
Weaver v. State
... ... 490] ... and under what circumstances a conviction on circumstantial ... evidence is warranted. This rule has been often recognized ... and applied: Jones v. State, 105 Ga. 649, 31 S.E ... 574; Hamilton v. State, 96 Ga. 301, 22 S.E. 528; ... McElroy v. State, 125 Ga. 37, 53 S.E. 759; Smith ... v. State, 125 Ga. 296, 54 S.E. 127. In the two latter ... cases it was held that, where there was evidence of a ... corroborated confession of the accused, the conviction would ... not depend entirely upon the circumstantial evidence which ... was involved in those cases, and in the ... ...
-
Brown v. State
...an appropriate request, it was not erroneous for the court to omit to charge the law of circumstantial evidence. Smith v. State, 125 Ga. 296, 299, 54 S.E. 127. See also, Pressley v. State, supra. "A conviction may be lawfully had upon a free and voluntary confession, though the same be not ......