*1 707 September 7, 17, 1977 1977 Submitted June 28, 1977. Dubberly, B. Daniel Phillips, D. Richard appellants. Stubbs,
M. Francis appellee. GODFREY. v. GODFREY
Bowles, Justice. of change of a appeal granting
This County. in the Court of Cobb Superior child custody March, 1976,and parties divorced were couple’s awarded appellant, Godfrey, custody Mrs. child. A was filed on November only complaint a that Godfrey, alleged Mr. appellee, wherein affecting in conditions welfare change substantial judgment the minor child had occurred since the final had entered. decree been the Superior before a Judge
The case was heard time evidence County Court of Cobb which had clearly appellant introduced which showed months home several with a married man living further showed to the divorce. The evidence subsequent had on her consort appellant’s relationship with appellee’s several occasions interfered with rights.
After all the evidence the court concluded hearing a creating her home and appellant opening up that the with living with a married man and family relationship adultery presence this man a state of a affected welfare change created substantial which to the custody warranted appellee. court, enumerates appellant
In her this appeal changed there were error trial court’s verdict had an adverse which conditions home verdict minor child in that upon parties’ abuse of the the evidence and was an unsupported by 708 Ashmore, court’s v. discretion. In Robinson (1974), stated,
Ga. this court "Changed conditions welfare a child affecting after the rendition of occurring a formal final will warrant the issuance of new *2 habeas court judgment by corpus effecting custody or is rights essentially a fact issue in each by individual case which must be decided the habeas court. And if corpus there is 'reasonable evidence’ in the record to support decision made the habeas by corpus in court or visitation then changing custody rights, decision of the corpus prevail habeas court must as a final and it will judgment, appeal.” be affirmed on We have carefully reviewed the evidence in this case and after was finding there "reasonable evidence” support record to the verdict say we cannot trial court abused its discretion changing minor to the appellee. Judgment concur, All the except Justices affirmed. J.,
Hall, who dissents. Argued July 11, 1977 September Duard McDonald, Smith, R. Don for appellant. Barnes & Roy Thomas J. E. Browning, Browning, Barnes, for appellee. Justice, dissenting.
I dissent court’s judgment because find the record on this appeal to be absolutely devoid of evi- dence that has any there adverse effect on this three-year-old child from flowing the mother’s admitted status her and sharing her child’s home with a married man. I note that the mother’s lover moved out of the home some three months prior and to there were no hearing, plans definite for his It return. is to me reading clear from transcript evidence and of the oral comments of judge, he was so aghast evidence adultery that he failed any to exercise discretion weighing welfare, the factors related to the and child’s I fear mother. the adulterous automatically against ruled action. reflex-type court has done the same that "the father lacks The trial admitted judge has a personality drive and he lacks a force little Indeed, mother, with the father’s poor history.” work work referred to her son’s he lives at age whom as life, jobs,” again as once "odd history throughout He ends,” jobs.” "odd finally again "odds and apt is to be week his maximum income $70 testified months. is seven longest any job and the he has held hand, steadily The has worked mother, on the other secretary; as a maintains years legal born; he and has him cared home into which has cared hours a woman who during working her him as her him he months old and loves eight since activities many The mother is involved church own. evidently participates; religion child also how to her. wondered aloud important judge any claim when she was religion mother could I do Jesus Christ himself adulteress. not understand demanding. have been so *3 of this amounts court’s affirmance parent A per
the establishment se rule: custodial if acquires se unfit he or she parent becomes on lover, absolutely no adverse though live-in even such a reject the child is shown. rule. GRAVITT v. THE STATE.
32481.
Justice.
from his conviction
appeals
Appellant Gravitt
robbery.
life sentence
armed
of discretion
the trial court
1.
find no abuse
We
a continuance.
motion for
denying appellant’s
the lack
showing
2.
no
being
There
not
defense,
trial court did
information
impaired
for an
camera
err in
motion
denying
discovery
files for
attorney’s
of the district
inspection
(1974).
State,
purposes. Hicks v.