Williams v. State, 54133
| Decision Date | 06 September 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,No. 54133,54133,2 |
| Citation | 237 S.E.2d 677,143 Ga.App. 177 |
| Parties | William H. WILLIAMS v. The STATE |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Robert E. Lanyon, Fort Valley, for appellant.
Walker P. Johnson, Jr., Dist. Atty., Charles H. Weston, Asst. Dist. Atty., Willis B. Sparks, III, Asst. Dist. Attys., Macon, for appellee.
The appellant was convicted by jury of first degree forgery. He appeals the denial of his motion for new trial, contending that the verdict was not supported by the evidence.
The appellant admits cashing a forged check for $95 drawn on his former employer's account, but denies that he forged the drawer's signature or that he knew the signature was forged. The check in question was made payable to Robert Williams and was purportedly endorsed by Robert Williams. The appellant claimed that a friend, Johnnie Lee Frank, gave him the check already endorsed and asked him to cash it. However, the convenience store cashier who cashed the check testified that the appellant represented himself as being Robert Williams and that he endorsed the check in that name in her presence.
The jury was authorized to disbelieve the appellant's testimony and to accept the cashier's testimony that the appellant had forged the endorsement. See, generally, Johnson v. State, 69 Ga.App. 663, 26 S.E.2d 482 (1943). The evidence amply supported the verdict, and it was not error to overrule the motion for new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Curry v. State, 63414
...appellant's testimony and to accept the cashier's testimony that the appellant had forged the endorsement. [Cit.]" Williams v. State, 143 Ga.App. 177, 237 S.E.2d 677 (1977). "Identity of the defendant is an issue for the trier of fact and the credibility of the witness [identifying the defe......
-
Holcombe v. Harris, 54121
... ... to public streets and highways and publicly-used private ways have not been extended in this state, but have been narrowed ... " Ga. Power Co. v. Murray, supra, quoting Greenfield v. Watson, 54 ... ...
-
Carter v. State
...conviction without consideration of the handwriting comparisons. See Neal v. State, 160 Ga.App. 834(1), 288 S.E.2d 241; Williams v. State, 143 Ga.App. 177, 237 S.E.2d 677. Furthermore, we agree with the trial judge that there was substantial compliance with the pretrial examination requirem......
-
Stocks v. State, 58928
...of defendant's motion for directed verdict. See Smith v. State, 146 Ga.App. 444(3), 246 S.E.2d 454. See generally Williams v. State, 143 Ga.App. 177, 237 S.E.2d 677, citing Johnson v. State, 69 Ga.App. 663, 26 S.E.2d 2. Even assuming that defendant had timely requested that the principles o......