153 Ga. 130 | Ga. | 1922
1. We can not say, as a matter of law, that the verdict was without evidence to support it.
2. It is urged that the court erred in charging the jury as follows: “ I charge you further, on the trial of rape, it is essential to show, either [by] direct or indirect evidence, that actual carnal knowledge or carnal sexual intercourse. However, slight penetration is deemed necessary.” It is not alleged in the motion for new trial in what respects this charge is erroneous. This instruction was substantially correct. Wesley v. State, 65 Ga. 731; Morris v. State, 54 Ga. 440.
3. No error is assigned in the ground of the motion for new trial alleging that the court did not caution the jury that they should disregard certain applause on the part of the spectators when a certain witness was testifying. Besides, this ground is too indefinite and .general to enable this court to ascertain therefrom what transpired on this occasion; and the recital of facts therein stated is not verified by the trial judge. For these reasons this ground can not be considered.
4. In the third ground of the amended motion it is alleged that “ the facts in the case required a full and complete charge, including the definition of expert testimony.” This ground is so general that no question is presented for decision by this court. Besides, there is no complaint of error therein.
5. The court did not err in permitting the victim of the alleged rape to testify against the defendant, on the ground that she was mentally incapable of so doing, there being evidence that she possessed sufficient strength of mind to render her competent to testify. Besides, in the ground of the motion for new trial raising this question, no error is alleged in any ruling of the court concerning this matter; and no error being alleged, there is nothing for this court to pass upon.
Judgment affirmed,.