From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sapp v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
May 4, 1981
280 S.E.2d 867 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)

Summary

In Sapp v. State, 158 Ga. App. 443, 444 (280 S.E.2d 867), where an accomplice had testified that neither he nor the defendant had permission to enter the burglarized residence and the evidence showed a "jalousied door" at the residence had been kicked in, this court held: "This latter evidence is sufficient in itself to prove [the defendant] was without lawful authority to enter [the victim's] dwelling house..."

Summary of this case from Lloyd v. State

Opinion

61416.

DECIDED MAY 4, 1981.

Burglary. Lowndes Superior Court. Before Judge Elliott.

Richard M. Cowart, for appellant.

H. Lamar Cole, District Attorney, Richard J. Shelton, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.


Appellant contends his burglary conviction was error because the state failed to prove, as alleged in the indictment, that the appellant "without authority" entered the "dwelling house of Cleo Stalvey."

We find no error. The victim Cleo Stalvey did not testify, but the investigating officer testified, apparently of his own knowledge, that Cleo Stalvey's residence is located at a particular address on Cat Creek Road, and that appellant rode with him in the county pointing out various houses he had burglarized, and pointed out "Cleo Stalvey's residence" as one that he had burglarized (see Strickland v. State, 137 Ga. App. 628 ( 224 S.E.2d 809)). The officer testified that he investigated the burglary at Cleo Stalvey's residence on the day her Sears TV was stolen. Sapp's accomplice testified that he and Sapp burglarized the dwelling house of Cleo Stalvey at a particular address and stole a Sears color TV. A residence is a dwelling place under Code Ann. § 26-1601. The evidence in the case adequately established that the premises entered were the dwelling of Cleo Stalvey. (See Murphy v. State, 238 Ga. 725, 729 ( 234 S.E.2d 911)).

The accomplice stated that neither he nor Sapp had permission to enter Mrs. Stalvey's residence. The evidence showed that a jalousied door at Mrs. Stalvey's residence had been kicked in. This latter evidence is sufficient in itself to prove Sapp was without lawful authority to enter Cleo Stalvey's dwelling house ( Aufderheide v. State, 144 Ga. App. 877, 878 ( 242 S.E.2d 758)), and, moreover, fully corroborates the accomplice's testimony that he and Sapp did not have lawful authority to enter. See R. T. M. v. State, 138 Ga. App. 92, 93 ( 225 S.E.2d 510); Lord v. State, 134 Ga. App. 683, 684 ( 215 S.E.2d 493).

Judgment affirmed. Shulman, P. J., and Sognier, J., concur.

DECIDED MAY 4, 1981.


Summaries of

Sapp v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
May 4, 1981
280 S.E.2d 867 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)

In Sapp v. State, 158 Ga. App. 443, 444 (280 S.E.2d 867), where an accomplice had testified that neither he nor the defendant had permission to enter the burglarized residence and the evidence showed a "jalousied door" at the residence had been kicked in, this court held: "This latter evidence is sufficient in itself to prove [the defendant] was without lawful authority to enter [the victim's] dwelling house..."

Summary of this case from Lloyd v. State
Case details for

Sapp v. State

Case Details

Full title:SAPP v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: May 4, 1981

Citations

280 S.E.2d 867 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)
280 S.E.2d 867

Citing Cases

Lloyd v. State

However, the officer investigating the crime did testify: "[t]he front door of the warehouse had been pried…

Casper v. State

Accordingly, we discern no abuse of discretion in the trial court's revocation of Casper's probation. Sapp v.…