*1 97 Materials, Inc., (1983). There, 167 Ga. 160 indemnity provision court held that a contractual be can enforced against an has employer paid compensation who workers’ benefits to Air Sargent Indus. Delta an injured employee. Cf. 251 91 108) (1983). Accordingly, question the second certified is in answered the affirmative. All questions
Certified answered. the Justices Gregory, who dissents.
Swift, Currie, Hiers, Currie, McGhee & Warner S. Sherie Bell Christy, Poe, Athans, James M. Michael J.
Brinson, Brinson, Askew & Berry, Robert M. for appellee.
Gregory, I respectfully adopt dissent for the reason that would gravity” “center of or “grouping theory of contracts” to resolve the (Second) conflicts of law issues in contract cases. Restatement Laws, (1971). Conflict of
40443. MELTON v. THE STATE. Presiding
Marshall, in argued, a case which a child-molester for the convicted first time at sentencing hearing, that the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient superior venue court held, i.e., which the trial the de- argues reversed, fendant that his conviction must and he further be argues that his retrial Jeopardy is barred under the Double Clause. here showed that the defendant on three occasions forcibly years had sexual relations stepdaughter, with his who was age at the time of and that this occurred at their home Park, Georgia. College partially Park is located in Fulton partially in Clayton County. The argues the evidence County, here is insufficient to show in Fulton relying on the holding “proof that an offense was committed designated municipality is not of itself sufficient to show venue particular this State ...” Gibson v. 52 Ga. 83) (1935) SE line of cases cits. state relies on the that, holding deciding whether the evidence is sufficient to prove venue, may the court take notice of fact that a particular county. is located within a Williams v. (1) (292 560) (1982) cits.; Ga., App. 680 G. S. K. v. State of 671) (1978) and cits. However, the evidence as to venue in this case showed more than Park; in College the crimes were committed the evidence also *2 County system. showed that the victim attended the Fulton school agree Appeals with the Court of that in the conflicting absence of evidence, this was sufficient party’s show that home was State, located in Fulton As supra, held Williams v. where contested, slight venue is not evidence will suffice.
Judgment Hill, affirmed. All the Justices C. Bell, JJ., Smith and who dissent. 31, 15, Deaton, Monroe,
Nathan B. Harvey A. for Slaton,District Attorney, Lewis V. Margaret R. Assistant Attorney, appellee. District
Smith, The constitutional and statutory require law of this state that all criminal cases be county tried where the crime was Const, 6, committed. Art. Sec. Par. Ga. of OCGA 17-2-2 § (Code 26-302). Ann. I appellant’s would reverse the conviction ground prove that the state did not that the crime with which he was charged was committed in county where he was tried.
Venue
jurisdictional
is a
proved beyond
fact that must be
a
doubt,
(156
215)
reasonable
State,
Toland
SE2d
(1967), and where there is insufficient evidence of venue the verdict
contrary
rendered is
to law and
support
without evidence to
it. Parks
663) (1956).
I am authorized to state that Chief Justice Hill Bell and Justice join in this dissent.
40475. HARDIN v. THE STATE.
Weltner, Thomas Hardin died from a gunshot wound his back. Ethel Hardin, wife, was convicted of murder and sentenced life imprisonment.
Hardin hired man kill failed, her plan husband. When that son, she enlisted the aid her who went to the construction site *3 stepfather where his was him in working, shot back with rifle, mother’s then hid the rifle in the basement of her home. son rifle, later led the police to the hidden pleaded guilty and to murder. He stated at stepfather trial that he shot his “because it was what ma wanted.”
1. Hardin contends that the state required produce, was her request, copies of witnesses’ transcripts statements certain tape recordings. requests pursuant were made to a motion under Brady Maryland, S.U. SC 10 LE2d produce. trial, notice to Prior defense was counsel permitted to read the tapes. statements to listen to the
“As
Stevens
pointed
(1)
was
out in
34Ga.
838) (1978), witness statements
not
produce,
are
to a notice to
subject
although exculpatory
subject
witness statements
are
to disclosure
Brady
under
Wilson v.
Maryland, supra.”
62, 65
Whether
exculpatory
or not these
were
statements
immaterial,
they
as
prior
were made available to the
defense
trial.
2. It not require production error to original refuse to tape recordings Hardin’s statements. Prior to defense counsel a transcript received of all such statements and also listened to the tapes. procedure 17-7-210(b) (Code complies fully with OCGA