Dawson v. State
Dawson v. State
Opinion of the Court
From a conviction of armed robbery, appellant brings this appeal. Appellant asserts that the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict of acquittal and in overruling his motion for new trial, both motions being predicated upon the alleged insufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction.
“One who intentionally aids or abets the commission of a crime by another is a party to the crime and equally guilty with the principal.” Bell v. State, 156 Ga. App. 190 (274 SE2d 153) (1980); Code Ann. § 26-801 (b) (3). While evidence of appellant’s participation in the armed robbery was circumstantial, it was sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of guilt. Bogan v. State, 158 Ga. App. 1 (279 SE2d 229) (1981). After a review
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.