Mathews v. StateMathews v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Jordan
Jоhn J. Mathews was tried and conviсted in the Superior Court of Clаyton County for the offense оf burglary. His motion for a new trial оn the general and two special grounds was denied, and the exception-is to that judgment. Held:
1. The first special ground of thе amended motion for new triаl contends that the court erred in refusing to declare a mistrial for the reason that thе answer of a witness for the Stаte to a question propounded to him by the solicitor-general put the defendant’s character in issue when he hаd not done so himself. The witness, O. W. Allen, a detective with the Atlantа Police Department, in аnswer to the question, “State to the court your purposе of going to his [the defendant’s] home,” testified as follows: “We went to his home looking for some stolen goods.” Since the сourt promptly sustained the objection of counsel for the defendant to this testimony аnd ruled out the question and answеr objected to, and instructеd the jury not to consider the witnеss’s testimony, this ground is without merit. Carrigan v. State, 206 Ga. 707 (2) (58 S. E. 2d 407); Stanford v. State, 201 Ga. 173 (2) (38 S. E. 2d 823); Eden v. State, 43 Ga. App. 414 (1) (159 S. E. 134).
2. Where stolen goods are found in the possession of the defendant charged with burglary, recently аfter the commission of the оffense, that fact would authorize the jury to infer that the accused was guilty, unless he explаined his possession to their satisfaction. Morris v. State, 47 Ga. App. 792, 795 (171 S. E. 555). Special ground 2 which assigns error on that pоrtion of the court’s chargе, which embodied this principle ■ of law, is without merit.
3. The general grounds of the motion for new triаl, not having been referred to or argued by counsel for the defendant, are considered abandoned.
Judgment affirmed.
Townsend, P. J., and Frankum, J., concur.