28 Ga. App. 107 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1922
The 2d headnote alone needs elaboration. It has been repeatedly ruled by the Supreme Court and this court that, although the evidence may tend to show a confession of guilt by the
Moreover, an inspection of the record in the Pierce case, supra, shows that there the evidence aliunde the confession was insufficient to authorize a conviction, but the court nevertheless held that, “ even If the evidence authorized a charge on the law of confessions, the failure to instruct the jury on that subject, in the absence of an appropriate written request so to do, was not cause for a new trial.” See also, in this connection, Lindsay v. State, 138 Ga. 818 (6) (76 S. E. 369), where it was said that “ The failure of the court to instruct the jury as to the weight of confessions as evidence is not error, in the absence of a timely written request that such charge be .given. Particularly is this true when the evidence other than that as to the confession is sufficient to warrant a conviction.”
Judgment affirmed.