Woodard v. State, 60018
| Decision Date | 03 September 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 60018,60018 |
| Citation | 271 S.E.2d 671,155 Ga.App. 533 |
| Parties | WOODARD v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Joseph M. Todd, Jonesboro, for appellant.
Robert E. Keller, Dist. Atty., Jack T. Wimbish, Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Defendant appeals his conviction of the offense of armed robbery. We affirm.
1. Appellant contends that his character was impermissibly placed in issue when a police officer testified at trial that he found an available photograph of the subject to show to certain potential witnesses for purposes of identifying the defendant. Appellant submits that such testimony indicated that defendant's photograph was already in police records, implying that defendant had been previously arrested or convicted of another crime. We find no error.
Under the authority of Creamer v. State, 229 Ga. 704(2), 194 S.E.2d 73, and Woodard v. State, 234 Ga. 901(2), 218 S.E.2d 629, we find that the police officer's mere reference to a photograph of the defendant, without more, did not inject the defendant's character into evidence. This enumeration does not therefore present grounds for reversal.
2. Defendant complains of the admission of evidence of independent crimes, similarly asserting that such evidence impermissibly placed his character in issue. Defendant acknowledges that evidence of independent crimes may be admissible for the purpose of showing common motive, plan or scheme, but argues that it was not established with sufficient certainty that defendant was the perpetrator of the independent crimes or shown with sufficient particularity that such crimes were similar or connected to the offense charged so as to render such evidence admissible. (For a general discussion of the prerequisites for the admissibility of evidence of independent crimes, see Bacon v. State, 209 Ga. 261, 71 S.E.2d 615).
We must take issue with appellant's contentions. In view of the fact that the offense charged and the independent crimes occurred on the same evening in the same geographical location (one involving a Majik Market as alleged in the case at bar, the other a gasoline station), the testimony of a witness (a taxicab driver) that he drove defendant to all three locations on the night in question and the in-court identification of defendant as the perpetrator of all three offenses, we hold that the trial court properly admitted evidence of the independent crimes for the purpose of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carter v. State
...inadmissible by the fact that defendant was not arrested and charged with the commission of the independent crime. Woodard v. State, 155 Ga.App. 533(2), 534, 271 S.E.2d 671. Also, the standard of proof of reasonable doubt is not applicable to the proof that the defendant was the perpetrator......
-
Richardson v. State, A90A2339
...did not place appellant's character in issue. See Lewis v. State, 255 Ga. 681, 682-683(2a), 341 S.E.2d 434 (1986); Woodard v. State, 155 Ga.App. 533(1), 271 S.E.2d 671 (1980). 2. Appellant claims that the trial court should have granted his motion for mistrial because the State placed his c......
-
Solomon v. State
...Jimerson v. State, 163 Ga.App. 54(1), 293 S.E.2d 513. 4. Seals v. State, 176 Ga.App. 67, 68(2), 335 S.E.2d 306. 5. Woodard v. State, 155 Ga.App. 533(1), 271 S.E.2d 671. 6. 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 7. (Citations omitted.) Jenkins v. State, 240 Ga. App. 102, 103(1), 522 S.E.2d ......
-
Chaney v. State
...v. State, 162 Ga.App. 527(1), 292 S.E.2d 114 (1982); Grant v. State, 161 Ga.App. 403(2), 288 S.E.2d 118 (1982); Woodard v. State, 155 Ga.App. 533(1), 271 S.E.2d 671 (1980). This is especially true when his response is viewed in conjunction with the follow-up testimony offered after the moti......