Sempo v. State

Houston v. State
334 S.E.2d 907 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985) Cited 5 times
Secondly, the basis argued at trial was not enumerated as error and must be considered abandoned on appeal. Kingston v. State, 127 Ga. App. 660, 661 ( 194 S.E.2d 675) [(1972)].'" Sempo v. State, 168 Ga. App. 152 (2) ( 308 S.E.2d 433) (1983). Accord 134 Baker Street, Inc. v. State, 172 Ga. App. 738 (5) ( 324 S.E.2d 575) (1984).
Jordan v. State
323 S.E.2d 657 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984) Cited 25 times
Con. Law - Due Process
In Jordan v. State, 172 Ga. App. 496, 498 (323 S.E.2d 657) (1984), the court found no ground for reversal where the state in closing argument referred to "some cases that you just wouldn't hardly believe, a fellow up in Chicago that lived in the neighborhood for years, Gracy fellow, who would have ever thought that? This minister that was up in Winchester or Manchester, Tennessee, several years ago, who would have ever thought that?," to suggest that those with outwardly impeccable moral character with strong moral and religious beliefs may be sex offenders.
The charge given was nearly verbatim to that approved by the Supreme Court in Spaulding v. State, 232 Ga. 411 (4) ( 207 S.E.2d 43) (1974). See also Sempo v. State, 168 Ga. App. 152 (3) ( 308 S.E.2d 433) (1983). It is clearly the law that the jury must vote either guilty or not guilty, and consequently the court likewise committed no error in advising the jury that they could not vote to "pass."