From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wood v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Sep 14, 1978
248 S.E.2d 337 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)

Opinion

56186.

ARGUED JUNE 27, 1978.

DECIDED SEPTEMBER 14, 1978.

Burglary. Carroll Superior Court. Before Judge Jackson.

Wiggins Camp, Daniel P. Camp, for appellant.

William P. Lee, Jr., District Attorney, Michael G. Kam, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.


Wood was convicted of burglary. The facts, viewed most favorably toward upholding the verdict, show that Wood was apprehended approximately six hundred feet from the scene of a wrecked vehicle owned by an acquaintance of Wood's. Inside the vehicle were various articles which appeared to be the same as those stolen from a local convenience store approximately one hour earlier. Wood, at the time of apprehension, had a recent cut on his nose, dirt in his hair, and gasoline on his clothes. This evidence, solely circumstantial in nature, was insufficient to authorize a conviction for burglary, notwithstanding the fact that it was not inconsistent with a theory of guilt. In order to sustain a conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence, the evidence must exclude every other reasonable hypothesis save that of the guilt of the defendant. See Mealor v. State, 134 Ga. App. 564 ( 215 S.E.2d 272); Rutland v. State, 129 Ga. App. 313 ( 199 S.E.2d 595). Accordingly, the trial court erred in failing to direct a verdict of acquittal in favor of Wood.

Judgment reversed. Bell, C. J., and Shulman, J., concur.

ARGUED JUNE 27, 1978 — DECIDED SEPTEMBER 14, 1978.


Summaries of

Wood v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Sep 14, 1978
248 S.E.2d 337 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)
Case details for

Wood v. State

Case Details

Full title:WOOD v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Sep 14, 1978

Citations

248 S.E.2d 337 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)
248 S.E.2d 337

Citing Cases

Muckle v. State

The most obvious deficiency in the evidence is that it did not place defendant at the scene of the crime. See…

Patterson v. State

Since there is no direct evidence of burglary in the instant case, the evidence must be such as to exclude…