Young v. State
| Decision Date | 07 February 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 54478,No. 1,54478,1 |
| Parties | Charles YOUNG v. The STATE |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Gregory A. King, Decatur, for appellant.
M. Randall Peek, Dist. Atty., George N. Guest, Asst. Dist. Atty., Decatur, for appellee.
Defendant was indicted for theft by taking. The property allegedly taken was seven men's shirts of the value of $153. The jury found the defendant guilty as charged, and he was sentenced by the trial court to serve a term of years in confinement. After his motion for new trial was denied, defendant appeals. Held :
1. Defendant contends that he was denied a fair and impartial trial due to the misconduct of various jurors. Defendant's counsel has submitted in his brief the affidavits of two of the jurors. One of these affidavits states that the juror referred to materials in the law library in an attempt to resolve the question of value. The other affidavit shows that another juror read and considered as evidence the indictment in an attempt to resolve this question.
Although defense counsel states in his brief that these affidavits were presented to the trial court on the hearing for motion for new trial they are not present in the record before this court. Nor is there any other evidence in the record to support this contention. This court cannot consider factual representations in the appellant's brief which do not appear in the record. Coweta Bonding Co. v. Carter, 230 Ga. 585, 586(1), 198 S.E.2d 281; Stone v. Ridgeway, 136 Ga.App. 264, 267(2), 220 S.E.2d 722.
2. The indictment charged that the property stolen was of a value of $153. On cross examination the State's witness was asked by defendant's counsel: In Brown v. State, 143 Ga.App. 678, 239 S.E.2d 556 we held that retail value or price was a permissible standard to be used in establishing value in theft cases from retail establishments. Thus the defendant himself on cross examination established the retail value of the shirts by eliciting the quoted testimony from the State's witness. Proof of retail price is a fact which proves value in theft cases and in these cases it is not opinion evidence. Whether the admission of the memorandum also showing the value of the shirts was or was not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Giddens v. State
...basis of factual allegations appearing only in the parties' brief and unsupported by the record from the trial court. Young v. State, 144 Ga.App. 712(1), 242 S.E.2d 351. The burden of showing harmful error rests on the appellant. Raymond v. State, 146 Ga.App. 452, 453(2), 246 S.E.2d 4. The ......
-
Price v. State
...assertions contained only in the briefs of the parties. Raymond v. State, 146 Ga.App. 452, 453(2), 246 S.E.2d 461; Young v. State, 144 Ga.App. 712(1), 242 S.E.2d 351. 5. The witness William Franklin Jones, was a jailer working for the sheriff's office, and during the period of defendant's i......
-
Allen v. State, 57522
...and control of the district attorney. The burden is on an appellant to show error by the record and not by the brief. Young v. State, 144 Ga.App. 712, 242 S.E.2d 351. Furthermore, no objection to the appointment of Mr. McDonald was made until after the trial was over. The objection came too......
-
Bryan v. State, 56639
...standard to be used in establishing value in theft by taking from a retail establishment. This rule was reaffirmed in Young v. State, 144 Ga.App. 712(2), 242 S.E.2d 351. The value of the item was established to be in excess of $100. Cox v. State, 137 Ga.App. 794(1), 224 S.E.2d 845; Brown v.......