Boatright v. State

5 Citing cases

  1. Hall v. State

    305 S.E.2d 666 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983)   Cited 1 times

    The record reveals that the prosecuting attorney's statement made during the closing argument was not of such a nature as to work prejudice to the appellant. See Boatright v. State, 150 Ga. App. 283 ( 257 S.E.2d 314) (1979). The court's instruction, "Members of the jury, the fact that somebody did not escape from custody has no probative value on whether they were guilty or innocent of any offense," is a correct statement of the law.

  2. Phillips v. State

    162 Ga. App. 471 (Ga. Ct. App. 1982)   Cited 8 times

    6. "No demonstration of reversible error has been made with regard to [appellant's] contention that. . . the district attorney, in violation of Code Ann. § 81-1009, improperly expressed opinions or made improper argument to the jury." Boatright v. State, 150 Ga. App. 283, 284 (3) ( 257 S.E.2d 314) (1979). Judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part.

  3. Jones v. State

    161 Ga. App. 610 (Ga. Ct. App. 1982)   Cited 13 times
    In Jones, a child molestation case, the defendant gave a statement that while cleaning the victim after she had diarrhea, his finger accidentally "`went into her vagina.'"

    We therefore find no reversible error in the admission of the testimony in the instant case for the limited purpose of explaining the witness' subsequent conduct. See Boatright v. State, 150 Ga. App. 283 (1) ( 257 S.E.2d 314) (1979). See also Bodrey v. Bodrey, 246 Ga. 122, 123 (2) ( 269 S.E.2d 14) (1980). If, as in the instant case, the victim's statement was admissible under Code Ann. § 38-202 to explain her subsequent conduct, it was not error to admit it for that limited purpose, "even though it would have been more regular to admit only the fact that a conversation occurred, without going into the particulars of what was said. [Cit.]"

  4. Jefferson v. State

    285 S.E.2d 213 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)   Cited 8 times

    5. Appellant's contention that the trial court erred in refusing to charge the jury that it might recommend that appellant be punished as a misdemeanor under the provisions of Code Ann. § 26-3101 (a) must be decided adversely to him on the basis of this court's decision in Cloud v. State, 136 Ga. App. 244 (2) ( 220 S.E.2d 763) (1975). See also Smokes v. State, 136 Ga. App. 8 (5) ( 220 S.E.2d 39) (1975); Richardson v. State, 144 Ga. App. 416 (3) ( 240 S.E.2d 917) (1977); Boatright v. State, 150 Ga. App. 283 (2) ( 257 S.E.2d 314) (1979). 6. The evidence at trial showed that one of the arresting police officers had been certified as required by Code Ann. Ch. 29A-21 and that the other arresting officer had been employed less than a year at the time of appellant's arrest.

  5. Boatright v. State

    270 S.E.2d 321 (Ga. Ct. App. 1980)   Cited 4 times

    Boatright was convicted in the Superior Court of Muscogee County of selling marijuana and on appeal this court affirmed his conviction. Boatright v. State, 150 Ga. App. 283 ( 257 S.E.2d 314) (1979). Boatright filed an extraordinary motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence in the Superior Court of Muscogee County; the motion was denied and Boatright appeals that ruling.