Appellant was convicted of burglary. His sole enumeration of error on appeal is that the trial court committed reversible error in failing to charge the jury on the law governing accomplice testimony and the necessity for corroboration thereof.
The transcript reveals that appellant neither requested a charge on the law governing the testimony of an accomplice nor excepted to the omission of such charge. Thus, appellant’s contention that the trial court erred in failing to so charge is controlled adversely to him by Durham v. State,
Moreover, the rule that a felony conviction is not to be had on the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice applies only when the accomplice is the sole witness upon whose testimony the state relies. Code Ann. § 38-121; Hall v. State,
Judgment affirmed.
