From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wade v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 12, 1978
249 S.E.2d 323 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)

Opinion

56356.

SUBMITTED SEPTEMBER 11, 1978.

DECIDED OCTOBER 12, 1978.

Robbery by sudden snatching. Hall Superior Court. Before Judge Scoggin, Senior Judge.

John W. Timmons, Jr., for appellant.

Jeff C. Wayne, District Attorney, for appellee.


Harold Wade appeals his conviction by a jury for robbery by sudden snatching.

1. It was not error for the trial court to charge the jury that they could convict the defendant if they believed beyond a reasonable doubt that "at any time within four years prior to the date of the finding and returning of this bill of indictment..." The date alleged is not material and "[t]he rule is generally that time is not of the essence, and that on a general presentment there may be a conviction of the offense charged within the period of the statute of limitation ..." Bloodworth v. State, 128 Ga. App. 657, 658 ( 197 S.E.2d 423) (1973).

2. The trial court's charge to the jury that they were the sole judges as to the credibility of the witnesses, the sole judges of the weight of the evidence, and the sole judges of the guilt or innocence of the prisoner does not amount to an impermissible comment on the defendant's silence; such an instruction merely explains the jury's function.

3. There was ample evidence to support the conviction.

Judgment affirmed. Smith and Banke, JJ., concur.

SUBMITTED SEPTEMBER 11, 1978 — DECIDED OCTOBER 12, 1978.


Summaries of

Wade v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 12, 1978
249 S.E.2d 323 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)
Case details for

Wade v. State

Case Details

Full title:WADE v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Oct 12, 1978

Citations

249 S.E.2d 323 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)
147 Ga. App. 511

Citing Cases

Mathis v. State

In his third enumeration of error, appellant contends the verdict is contrary to the law and without evidence…

Lynn v. State

We see no reason to change that approval now, particularly in light of the trial court's instructions here…