*1 507 in af- meaning the any practical this to have For doctrine to life, of a legislative grant power of the everyday fairs enables the latter to arbitrar- which municipal government con- to one of its citizens can not be a beer ily deny permit stitutionally upheld. of the trial judgment
It that I affirm the follows would court. that Jus-
I I am authorized to state respectfully dissent. me in this dissent. joins tice Hawes 27305. SNEED v. CALDWELL. corpus review of a habeas appeal This seeks
Per curiam. custody the to the judgment appellant which remanded of the appellee. to allegations respect made four below with appellant
The The trial con- illegality judge the of his confinement. that of the a and he concluded three hearing, ducted full in were the application contained the current allegations corpus application matter of a habeas subject previous had allegations the and those three brought by appellant; ad- in the habeas case previous corpus been determined Therefore, held judge to 'the the trial versely appellant. (10) al- Ann. 50-127 those three pursuant that to Code § in prior determined a legations, having previously been action, without merit. habeas were corpus in by raised appellant The fourth had not been allegation It of the complained action. previous corpus his habeas on the issue of convicting to the in the court charge jury the decisions of this court judge alibi. The trial followed alibi, he held that the charge with to the on and respect of due charge process. was not violative convicting in court was as follows: charge The on alibi the of the ac- impossibility "Alibi as a defense involves the time of at the of the offense at the presence cused’s scene in respect of the evidence range its commission and the 508 reasonably
to time and must be such as to exclude place Alibi possibility presence. the of as a defense must be jury to the reasonable satisfaction of the and established reasonably possibility must be such as to exclude the of the of the defendant at the of the offense presence scene at the time of its commission. so established to the When *2 satisfaction of the jury, jury acquit. reasonable the. should Any evidence in the nature of an alibi should be consid- in by ered the connection with all of the other evi- jury case, doing jury dence in the and if in so the should guilt entertain a doubt of the of the accused reasonable acquit.” the should jury or in lan- charge, charge substantially
This this the same guáge, many has attacked in recent as. years been times However, of being process. violative due this court has held that a consistently charge this is not burden-shift- Trim- ing and is not charge process. violative of due See State, ble v. 229 Ga. 399. All
Judgment concur, Hawes, the Justices except affirmed. Jordan, JJ., Gunter and who dissent. July September 10, 25, 1972.
Submitted 1972 Decided Sneed, pro se. Bill Bolton, Attorney General, Hill, Jr.,
Arthur K. Harold N. Attorney General, Courtney Executive Assistant Wilder Stan- ton, King., Jr., General, David Attorneys L. G. Assistant for appellee. Justice, of the that the dissenting. Being opinion
Gunter,
case,
court,
in
in
a
charge
given
convicting
this
the
was
burden-shifting
charge and
of due pro-
therefore violative
cess, I
in
respectfully
my dissenting
dissent. See
opinion
State,
Trimble v.
I am authorized to state that Hawes and Justice Justice in this join Jordan me dissent.