22 S.E.2d 347 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1942
1. Where the defendant is charged with selling "prohibited liquors" and he has voluntarily testified in a previous trial of his brother in a criminal case and made statements which would tend to incriminate him, it is competent to prove such statements on the subsequent trial of the defendant. Code § 58-118 is not applicable under such circumstances.
2. Admissions or confessions under such circumstances may be proved in the same manner and for the same reasons that admissions made out of court may be proved.
3. The evidence authorized the verdict.
"A voluntary confession of guilt, not improperly induced, is always admissible against the party who makes it; and the general rule on this subject is not changed by the fact that the confession happens to be made under oath while the party is being *128
examined as a witness in another trial." Henderson v. State,
In the case sub judice the State established the corpus delicti, and the testimony given by the accused on the previous trial of his brother was an admission that he had sold the prohibited liquors as charged in the instant case. This evidence authorized the verdict. Miller v. State,
The judge did not err in overruling the motion for new trial.
Judgment affirmed. Broyles, C. J., and Gardner, J., concur.