TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Solomon v. State

Solomon v. State, 73 S.E. 623 (Ga. Ct. App. 1912)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals of Georgia · State Appellate Courts
Decided
January 30, 1912
Docket
No. 3902
Judges
Russell
Citations
73 S.E. 62310 Ga. App. 4691912 Ga. App. LEXIS 569
Cited by 21
Summary
Indictment for arson; from Coffee superior court — Judge Parker.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Russell

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Russell, J.

1. There was no error in overruling the motion for a continuance, especially in view of the fact that it did not appear that the movant had subpoenaed the absent witness before he left the jurisdiction of the court, or had exercised any diligence in attempting to procure his presence.

2. Under the facts of this case, failure of the court to instruct the jury upon the subject of alibi was not reversible error, in the absence of a timely and appropriate written request. Smith v. State, 6 Ga. App. 577 ( 65 S. E. 300 ).

3. It is within the power and right of a jury to believe a witness, no matter what effort may have been made to impeach him, or what testimony has been presented for that purpose, and even though the witness be not corroborated. The credibility of witnesses is exclusively for the jury, and it is not error to instruct the jury that they may accept the explanation of a witness as to why he has made contradictory statements, even though it be not sustained by other facts or circumstances.

4. There was no error in allowing a witness to state, in explanation of his reason for leaving his former residence, that he did so because certain persons put him in fear of his personal safety. It not appearing that the defendant was one of the parties who were alleged to have intimidated the witness, the testimony could not have been prejudicial to the defendant, but would seem to have been rather to his advantage.

5. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the trial appears to have been free from error. Judgment affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 21 cases

View all citing references →
1914: 21915: 21916: 41917: 11932: 11935: 21937: 11946: 11954: 11956: 11974: 21980: 11981: 11983: 119142026peak 1916 · 4

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Fulmer v. State39 S.E.2d 732 (Ga. Ct. App. 1946)
  2. Strong v. State206 S.E.2d 461 (Ga. 1974)
  3. Rice v. City of Eatonton83 S.E. 868 (Ga. Ct. App. 1914)
  4. Hester v. State284 S.E.2d 659 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)
  5. Cartin v. Boles270 S.E.2d 799 (Ga. Ct. App. 1980)
  6. Rudulph v. State85 S.E. 365 (Ga. Ct. App. 1915)

Most recent

  1. Hayes v. State309 S.E.2d 843 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983)
  2. Hester v. State284 S.E.2d 659 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)
  3. Cartin v. Boles270 S.E.2d 799 (Ga. Ct. App. 1980)
  4. Strong v. State206 S.E.2d 461 (Ga. 1974)
  5. Wooster v. Boles203 S.E.2d 745 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974)
  6. Griffin v. Ross91 S.E.2d 815 (Ga. Ct. App. 1956)

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.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Smith v. State, 65 S.E. 300 (Ga. Ct. App. 1909) 14

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list