Sterling v. State
| Decision Date | 01 August 1892 |
| Citation | 89 Ga. 807,15 S.E. 743 |
| Parties | Sterling v. State. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
a8sault with intent to kill — arguments of Counsel—Verdict—Recommendation to Meroy—Circumstantial Evidence—New Trial.
1. In opening a criminal case to a jury, preliminary to the introduction of evidence, the solicitor general may state what he hopes to prove, tending to show the motive under which the accused acted in committing the alleged offense. If, on objection to the statement, the court declines to interfere, but instructs the jury that, if the solicitor does not prove what he says he hopes or expects to prove, then they shall give the matter no consideration whatever, no error is committed.
2. On the trial of an indictment for assault with intent to murder, though there be no direct evidence pointing distinctly to any specific mo tive, the solicitor general, in commenting on the evidence in his argument, may advance and urge any theory as to the motive which is not absolutely inconsistent with the facts and circumstances in proof; motive being pertinent, and inferences from circumstances being legitimate and proper means of arriving at it.
3. The Code, § 4656, declaring that, "in all cases where the term of punishment in the penitentiary is discretionary, the court shall determine that punishment, paying due respect to any recommendation which the jury may think proper to make in that regard, " and assault with intent to murder being one of these offenses, it was not error to charge: "In the event that you should think and believe from the testimony that the defendant is guilty of the offense charged, it is your privilege to recommend the defendant to mercy, after finding a verdict of guilty, and the court would sentence the defendant, upon conviction, taking into consideration your recommendation to mercy."
4. A conviction of assault with intent to murder, on circumstantial evidence, may be had, although no particular motive for the commission of the offense is apparent to the jury, and although they may be unable to determine from the evidence what his motive really was.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from superior court, Sumter county; W. H. Fish, Judge.
Charles Sterling was indicted for an assault with intent to murder, and was found guilty, with a recommendation to mercy. A motion for a new trial was overruled, and defendant brings error. Affirmed.
The following is the official report:
The first special ground of the motion is as follows: Before any evidence had been introduced, the solicitor general was proceeding to open the case to the jury. He stated what he expected to prove, and also stated that he hoped to prove, but did not know whether he could prove it or not, that the motive actuating the defendant to make the assault was that Phillips was the night watchman at the guano factory in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Alexander v. State
... ... Historically, this Court has not even considered the question of good faith in the prosecutor's opening statement, where the trial court instructs the jury to disregard what the prosecutor says he hopes or expects to prove, but does not prove. Sterling v. State, 89 Ga. 807(1), [270 Ga. 352] 15 S.E. 743 (1892). Eventually, good faith was acknowledged as the general test in passing upon the prosecutor's opening statement. Daniels v. State, 58 Ga.App. 599, 605(3), 199 S.E. 572 (1938). However, contrary to the assertion of the majority, no Georgia ... ...
-
Dorsey v. State, No. S05A0897.
... ... See Wall v. State, 153 Ga. 309(1), 112 S.E. 142 (1922) (evidence of motive is always relevant and admissible); Sterling v. State, 89 Ga. 807, 15 S.E. 743 (1892) (prosecutor may advance any theory as to motive which is not absolutely inconsistent with the facts). We also note that the allegations of motive were not limited to theft. The indictment alleged that Dorsey solicited Brown's murder "in an effort both to ... ...
-
Jones v. State
... ... discretionary, the jury may in their verdict make a ... recommendation as to the extent of the punishment, though the ... judge is not bound to respect the recommendation; and it is ... not error for the judge so to instruct the jury. Pen. Code ... 1895, § 1037; Sterling v. State, 89 Ga. 807, 15 S.E ... Error ... from Superior Court, Chattooga County; N. A. Morris, Judge ... Louis ... Jones was convicted of manslaughter, and brings error ... Reversed ... J. M ... Bellah, and F. W. Copeland, for ... ...
- Harrison v. Perry