Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
ยง
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Bruno v. State

3 Citing cases

  1. Beetles v. State

    48 S.E.2d 94 (Ga. 1948)   Cited 1 times

    Bradley v. State, 128 Ga. 20 (3) ( 57 S.E. 237). See also Johnson v. State, 151 Ga. 21 (2) ( 105 S.E. 603); Adkins v. State, 187 Ga. 519 (1) ( 1 S.E.2d 420); Nelson v. State, 187 Ga. 576 ( 1 S.E.2d 641); Screws v. State, 188 Ga. 678 ( 4 S.E.2d 601); Bruno v. State, 189 Ga. 74 (3) ( 5 S.E.2d 376). 2.

  2. Hill v. State

    39 S.E.2d 675 (Ga. 1946)   Cited 28 times

    Accordingly, the evidence and the defendant's statement considered together authorized the verdict finding the defendant guilty of murder. Code, ยง 26-501; Futch v. State, 137 Ga. 75 (3) ( 72 S.E. 911); Fudge v. State, 148 Ga. 149 (2) ( 95 S.E. 980); Bruno v. State, 189 Ga. 74 (3) ( 5 S.E.2d 376); White v. State, 18 Ga. App. 214 (2) ( 89 S.E. 175). See also, in this connection, article entitled "The Law of Homicide" (Perkins), in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology of North-western University, Vol. 36, pp. 392, 401-405.

  3. Porter v. State

    36 S.E.2d 794 (Ga. 1946)   Cited 15 times
    In Porter v. State, 200 Ga. 246, 36 S.E.2d 794 (1946), the current test was set out: "The burden is on the accused to sustain his defense of alibi to the reasonable satisfaction of the jury in order to overcome proof of his guilt of the crime with which he is charged.

    the defendant as principal in the second degree, the guilt of the principal in the first degree must be shown by the introduction of the record of his indictment and verdict of guilty. That one indicted as the principal perpetrator of a crime may be convicted as a principal in the second degree where the facts on his trial show that the crime was committed by another and the defendant was present, aiding and abetting in the felonious design, has been ruled in innumerable decisions of this court, among which are: Hill v. State, 28 Ga. 604; Leonard v. State, 77 Ga. 764; Collins v. State, 88 Ga. 347 ( 14 S.E. 474); McLeod v. State, 128 Ga. 17 (3) ( 57 S.E. 83); Bradley v. State, 128 Ga. 20 (3) ( 57 S.E. 237); Johnson v. State, 148 Ga. 546 (2) ( 97 S.E. 515); Rawlings v. State, 163 Ga. 406, 422 ( 136 S.E. 448); Hatcher v. State, supra; Nelson v. State, 187 Ga. 576, 580 (2) ( 1 S.E.2d 641); Adkins v. State, 187 Ga. 519 (1) ( 1 S.E.2d 420); Screws v. State, 188 Ga. 678 (2) ( 4 S.E.2d 601); Bruno v. State, 189 Ga. 74 (3) ( 5 S.E.2d 376). In Nelson v. State, supra, it was pointed out that this principle was reasserted in Johnson v. State, 151 Ga. 21 (2) ( 105 S.E. 603), where Washington v. State, 36 Ga. 222, and Shaw v. State, 40 Ga. 120, holding otherwise, were reviewed and expressly overruled in so far as they were in conflict with what was ruled in the Johnson case, and it was stated in that case that they were at variance with the older case of Hill v. State, supra.