Supreme Court of Georgia, 1906

Chandler v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia · Decided February 15, 1906 · Beck

124 Ga. 821; 53 S.E. 91; 1906 Ga. LEXIS 630

Cases that cite this one

12 later published cases cite this decision.

Jones v. State (Ga. 1953)
Gaddy v. Harmon (Ga. 1941)
Arkansas Fuel Oil Co. v. Andrews Point Co. (Ga. Ct. App. 1941)
Perryman v. State (Ga. Ct. App. 1940)
Baker v. Augusta Veneer Co. (Ga. Ct. App. 1933)
Reed v. State (Ga. 1926)
Varnum v. State (Ga. Ct. App. 1920)
Gambo v. Dugas & Son (Ga. 1916)
Brown v. State (Ga. Ct. App. 1915)
Golatt v. State (Ga. 1908)
Brandt v. Buckley (Ga. Ct. App. 1921)
Evitt v. Western & Atlantic Railroad (Ga. Ct. App. 1919)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Beck, J.

.1. Though the fear of being convicted of an offense against the penal laws of the State will not excuse a witness for swearing falsely, yet where upon a succeeding trial he admits the falsehood of the testimony formerly given and deposes to the contrary of that testimony, attributing his perjury -to the fear above set out, it may. afford a moral explanation sufficient to account to the jury for the false testimony; and where the explanation is satisfactory to the jury, the witness may be believed with or without corroborating circumstances or supporting evidence. See McCoy v. State, 78 Ga. 490; Burns v. State, 89 Ga. 528(6) ; Muff v. State, 104 Ga. 521.

2. It is manifestly not harmful error for the court to interrupt defendant’s counsel during the cross-examination of a witness for the State and to suggest that he change the language of his question,' when the witness in 'his answer gives the testimony "sought to be elicited by the original question of the attorney.

3. No error was committed in the charge complained of. The verdict was amply supported by the evidence, and the court properly refused to grant a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

■ All the Justices concur. G. L. Callaway and B. L. Wall, for jplaintiff in error. J. S. Reynolds, solicitor-general, by J ohn M. Graham, contra.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.