Thomas v. State
| Decision Date | 06 April 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. 1,No. 35499,35499,1 |
| Parties | W. George THOMAS v. STATE of Georgia |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Wm. G. McRae, Bruce Edwards, Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
Paul Webb, Sol. Gen., Atlanta, for defendant in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court.
1. In a disbarment proceeding, which necessarily involves the honesty, probity, and good moral character of the accused he may present evidence of his good character, not to justify or excuse an offense with which he is charged, but to support his denial of the charge and in mitigation of the gravity and consequences of the offense. Lenihan v. Commonwealth, 165 Ky. 93, 105, 176 S.W. 948, L.R.A. 1917, 1132; 5 Am.Jur. 438, s294. See generally, as to the right to submit character evidence in cases involving the character of the defendant, Code, § 38-202; McNabb v. Lockhart & Thomas, 18 Ga. 495(11); German-American Mutual Life Ass'n, 102 Ga. 720, 744, 29 S.E. 615; Mays v. Mays, 153 Ga. 835, 113 S.E. 154; Wimberly v. Toney, 175 Ga. 416, 423, 165 S.E. 257; Caldwell v. Caldwell, 59 Ga.App. 637(1), 1 S.E.2d 764.
2. In the present case--where disbarment proceedings were brought against the defendant attorney, charging that, while acting as the administrator of a named estate, he 'committed acts of deceit and wilful misconduct which render him unfit to enjoy the privileges of attorney at law,' for that he did, while acting as such administrator, 'fraudulently and wilfully convert to his own use' a named sum of money which had come into his hands as administrator, and where he admitted on the trial employing funds of the estate for his own personal use, but denied that he used the money with an intention of defrauding the estate, and stated that he did not defraud any one, but believed that, because of fees and money due him, he was solvent and at all times intended to make a full and fair accounting, and it was shown that he had made a final accounting with the court of ordinary as to the estate and had received letters of dismission--the trial court erred in refusing to allow a number of witnesses to testify to his good character, including the period in which he is alleged to have misused the funds of the estate.
(a) Wood v. State ex rel. Boykin, 45 Ga. App. 783(1), 165 S.E. 908, is not contrary to what is here ruled, it being there held only that mere good conduct and reformation, subsequent to the alleged misconduct of an attorney, would constitute no defense to the original misconduct.
3. The prosecution having elicited from a representative of the defendant's bondsman, while on the stand, testimony that a security deed executed by the defendant, subsequently to the alleged misuse of funds by the defendant, in consideration of the bondsman paying to the estate certain money for him, had been foreclosed, and that a subsequent written agreement between the same parties was entered into, permitting the defendant to redeem the property by making stipulated payments, the trial court erred in refusing to admit in evidence the written contract as evidencing the subsequent agreement. Citizens & Southern Bank v. Barron, 181 Ga. 351(2), 181 S.E. 859; Georgia Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. Marshall, 207 Ga. 314(1), 61 S.E.2d 469.
4. Inasmuch as the case is being reversed for the reasons above stated, it is unnecessary to pass upon the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thomas v. State, 36591
...The case has been before this court on two previous occasions. Thomas v. State of Georgia, 87 Ga.App. 765, 75 S.E.2d 193; Thomas v. State, 91 Ga.App. 804, 87 S.E.2d 239. On the trial that we now review the plaintiff proved that Thomas converted a large sum of the estate's money to his own u......
-
Rutledge v. Crowe
... ... Anderson v. State, 196 Ga. 468, 471, 26 S.E.2d 755; Deaton v. Swanson, 196 Ga. 833(5), 28 S.E.2d 126; Edmiston v. Whitley Land Co., 198 Ga. 546, 549, 32 S.E.2d 259; ... ...