Smith 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.
Beck, J.
1. Where it was sought to prove by a witness for the State that the defendant, had made a confession, and the witness referred to testified that the confession was made freely and voluntarily, not under the influence of any threat or promise, under the rule of law that confessions are to be passed upon by the jui'y in all respects the court did not err in admitting the evidence of confession, over objection made by counsel for the defendant on the ground that “the statement was made by the defendant after he had been run down by a posse and caught by dogs, and that he was in the possession of the coroner.” Price v. State, 114 Ga. 855 ( 40 S. E. 1015 ); Holsenbake v. State, 45 Ga. 43 .
2. Failure of the court to charge the jury on the law of confessions is not ground for a new trial, where there was no written request for a charge on that subject.
3. There was ample evidence to support the verdict.
Judgment affirmpd.
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.