Baker v. State
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Canddek, J.
1. A charge upon the law as to the impeachment of witnesses was not requested in writing. In the absence of such written request the failure of the judge to so charge will not be held error. Watts v. State, 120 Ga. 496; Anderson v. State, 117 Ga. 255 .
2. An accomplice is one who is present at the commission of the crime, aiding and abetting the perpetrator. “Criminal intent is a necessary ingredient of crime, and is an essential to render one an accomplice.” Applying these principles of law to the facts of the present case, there was no witness for the State who was an accomplice in the commission of the crime charged against the accused; and it was not error for the court to fail to charge, “the law relating to conviction upon the evidence of an accomplice.’” Birdsong v. State, 120 Ga. 850, 854 ; Walker v. State, 118 Ga. 767 , and cit.
3. The evidence was amply sufficient to warrant the conviction of the accused, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 11 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.