From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Glass v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Sep 7, 1983
307 S.E.2d 287 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983)

Opinion

66220.

DECIDED SEPTEMBER 7, 1983.

Voluntary manslaughter. Fulton Superior Court. Before Judge Langford.

Susan E. Teaster, for appellant.

Lewis R. Slaton, District Attorney, Joseph J. Drolet, John M. Turner, Jr., Benjamin H. Oehlert III, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellee.


Appellant appeals from the judgments of conviction and sentences entered on jury verdicts finding him guilty of voluntary manslaughter and aggravated assault.

1. The general grounds are enumerated, the assertion being that appellant's actions were justified by reasons of self-defense.

The evidence adduced at trial, although conflicting, authorized the verdicts. Carter v. State, 232 Ga. 654, 659 (5) ( 208 S.E.2d 474) (1974). "It is well settled that the weight of the evidence and the credibility of witnesses are questions for the triers of fact. [Cits.] This court passes on the sufficiency of the evidence, not its weight, which was considered by the jury, [Cit.] and we find that a rational trier of fact could reasonably have found from the evidence adduced at trial proof of appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. [Cit.]" Mosley v. State, 157 Ga. App. 578 (1) ( 278 S.E.2d 154) (1981). See also Martin v. State, 164 Ga. App. 500 ( 297 S.E.2d 112) (1982); Malone v. State, 160 Ga. App. 883 (1) ( 288 S.E.2d 595) (1982).

2. Two enumerations of error relate to the manner in which the cross-examination of appellant was conducted by the assistant district attorney. Appellant does not assert that the objections that he now raises on appeal were raised in the trial court. Our independent review of the relevant portions of the transcript indicates that no timely objections to appellant's cross-examination were in fact made. Accordingly, these enumerations of error present nothing for review. Farmer v. State, 107 Ga. App. 215 (1) ( 129 S.E.2d 404) (1963).

3. The remaining enumeration of error relates to the trial court's giving of a certain jury instruction. Our review of the transcript demonstrates that, although the trial court inquired whether there was any objection, defense counsel raised no objection to the charge now asserted to be erroneous nor did he reserve the right to raise objections to the trial court's instructions until a later time. Accordingly, the right to enumerate error as to the charge has been waived. See White v. State, 243 Ga. 250 ( 253 S.E.2d 694) (1979).

Judgment affirmed. Deen, P. J., and Banke, J., concur.

DECIDED SEPTEMBER 7, 1983.


Summaries of

Glass v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Sep 7, 1983
307 S.E.2d 287 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983)
Case details for

Glass v. State

Case Details

Full title:GLASS v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Sep 7, 1983

Citations

307 S.E.2d 287 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983)
307 S.E.2d 287

Citing Cases

Asbury v. State

]" Miller v. State, 166 Ga. App. 639, 640-41 ( 305 S.E.2d 172) (1983). See Hutchins v. State, 171 Ga. App.…