Estes v. State
| Decision Date | 10 October 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 24846,24846 |
| Citation | 224 Ga. 687,164 S.E.2d 108 |
| Parties | Felicia ESTES v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Admission of testimony of a police officer as to conversations with two persons was not erroneous as hearsay.
2. Testimony as to the contents of a statement by the defendant was properly admitted.
3. The evidence authorized the verdict of guilty.
John L. Respess, Jr., James R. Venable, H. G. McBrayer, Jr., Atlanta, for appellant.
Albert Wallace, Sol. Gen., Jonesboro, Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Marion O. Gordon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Courtney Wilder Stanton, Atlanta, for appellee.
This appeal is by Mrs. Felicia Estes following her conviction and sentence for the murder of her husband Joe Douglas Estes. She was indicted by the grand jury of Clayton County for the homicide, was found guilty with recommendation of mercy upon trial in the superior court of that county, and thereupon was sentenced to life imprisonment.
1. Two of the enumerations complain of the admission of testimony of a police officer, in that his testimony related to conversations which were not in the defendant's presence and therefore were hearsay and inadmissible. These enumerations are quite similar and may be treated together.
The police officer was asked what two named persons told him that caused him to go to a hospital to talk with the defendant after the homicide had been discovered. Upon objection to the question as calling for hearsay, the solicitor general replied that he was asking the question to explain the conduct of the police officer in going to the hospital to talk with the defendant, not as proof of the facts stated but merely to show that such persons told the officer this and he acted upon what the persons told him. The judge allowed the question to be asked. The officer answered to the effect that one person told him that the defendant said she had shot the deceased, and that another person told him that the first person asked him to help him at the defendant's home. Thereupon, the defendant's counsel again objected. The solicitor general reiterated its purpose and the judge allowed it only for that purpose, so instructing the jury.
No error was committed in admitting this testimony since it was allowed for the sole purpose of explaining the officer's conduct. See Code § 38-302; Bryant v. State, 191 Ga. 686(14), 13 S.E.2d 820; Jones v. State, 224 Ga. 283, 285, 161 S.E.2d 302.
2. Another enumeration relating to the admission of evidence complains of the testimony of two police officers as to a statement of the defendant at the hospital on the night of the homicide. The appellant urges that the statement was not freely and voluntarily made because she was not in a condition to make a coherent statement or to protect her constitutional rights, and that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hewitt v. State
...Such testimony to explain conduct in looking for and finding the accused in such location was admissible.' In accord are Estes v. State, 224 Ga. 687(1), 164 S.E.2d 108; Bryant v. State, 191 Ga. 686, 689(14), 13 S.E.2d 820; Nance v. State, 123 Ga.App. 410, 411, 181 S.E.2d 295; Daniel v. Stat......
-
McAllister v. Brown
...was admissible as original evidence to explain conduct and comes within an exception to the hearsay rule (Code § 38-302; Estes v. State, 224 Ga. 687, 164 S.E.2d 108). McAllister v. State, 231 Ga. 368, 202 S.E.2d In the Estes case supra a police officer explaining why he went to a hospital t......
-
Humphreys v. The State
...The fact that Humphreys became emotional during his statement is not sufficient to render it involuntary. See Estes v. State, 224 Ga. 687, 688(2), 164 S.E.2d 108 (1968). Nor does Humphreys's refusal to sign a Miranda form render his statement involuntary and Kelly v. State, 250 Ga.App. 793,......
-
Harrell v. State, 33021
...512 (1972); Pitts v. State, 226 Ga. 878, 178 S.E.2d 177 (1970); Jones v. State, 224 Ga. 283(3), 161 S.E.2d 302 (1968); Estes v. State, 224 Ga. 687, 164 S.E.2d 108 (1968); Phillips v. State, 206 Ga. 418(3), 57 S.E.2d 555 (1950); Bryant v. State, 191 Ga. 686(14), 13 S.E.2d 820 The evidentiary......