From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Holt v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Aug 20, 1993
435 S.E.2d 288 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993)

Opinion

A93A1587.

DECIDED AUGUST 20, 1993.

Burglary. Richmond Superior Court. Before Judge Fleming.

Stanley C. House, for appellant.

Daniel J. Craig, District Attorney, Charles R. Sheppard, for appellee.


Defendant was convicted of burglary and he appealed. Held:

1. In his first enumeration of error, defendant contends the trial court erred in admitting a bloodstained towel into evidence, arguing that it was not relevant. We disagree. The evidence demonstrated that a burglar entered the victim's house by breaking a windowpane; that the towel was in the house, serving as a buffer between a television set and a wooden table; and that the towel did not have bloodstains on it before the burglary. It follows that the towel was relevant to show the forcible and unauthorized nature of the burglar's entry into the victim's house. See Harris v. State, 142 Ga. App. 37, 41 (7) ( 234 S.E.2d 798) (evidence is relevant if it logically tends to prove or disprove a material fact at issue in the case). The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the towel into evidence. See Johnson v. State, 148 Ga. App. 702 (1), 703 ( 252 S.E.2d 205) (if relevancy is doubtful, evidence should be admitted).

2. The trial court did not err in permitting a police officer to testify that the State's witnesses picked defendant's photograph out of a photographic line-up. "A law enforcement officer is permitted to testify to a vocal fact of identification witnessed by himself without its being subject to a hearsay objection." Bruce v. State, 142 Ga. App. 211, 212 (2), 213 ( 235 S.E.2d 606).

3. Two thirteen-year-old witnesses testified that they saw defendant leaving the victim's house. No objection was raised as to the competency of these witnesses. It cannot be said, therefore, that the trial court erred in failing to determine the competency of these witnesses at trial. Dunn v. State, 83 Ga. App. 682 (1) ( 64 S.E.2d 478).

4. Inasmuch as the trial court fully and appropriately charged the jury on the principle of "reasonable doubt," it did not err in refusing to give the defendant's proposed instruction on "reasonable doubt." Fowler v. State, 188 Ga. App. 873 (1) ( 374 S.E.2d 805).

5. We decline defendant's invitation to revisit and overrule Ross v. State, 192 Ga. App. 65, 67 (5) ( 383 S.E.2d 627). The trial court's charge on alibi was not unconstitutionally burden-shifting. It did not shift the burden to defendant to prove that he was not at the scene of the burglary.

Judgment affirmed. Johnson and Blackburn, JJ., concur.

DECIDED AUGUST 20, 1993.


Summaries of

Holt v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Aug 20, 1993
435 S.E.2d 288 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993)
Case details for

Holt v. State

Case Details

Full title:HOLT v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Aug 20, 1993

Citations

435 S.E.2d 288 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993)
435 S.E.2d 288

Citing Cases

Smith v. State

Id. (citations and punctuation omitted); White v. State, 244 Ga. App. 54, 55 (1) ( 537 S.E.2d 364) (2000)…

Horner v. State

Johnson v. State, 247 Ga. App. 660, 663(3) ( 544 S.E.2d 496) (2001).Holt v. State, 210 Ga. App. 81 (2) ( 435…