lawskills
Loading
Did you know you can download our entire database for free?


Resources
[more] 

Georgia Caselaw:
Browse
Greatest Hits

Georgia Code: Browse

(external) Findlaw Georgia Law Resources


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Lawskills.com Georgia Caselaw
PARKER v. THE STATE.
34124.
Arson; from Screven Superior Court-- Judge Renfroe. March 31, 1952.
TOWNSEND, J.
The testimony of the accomplice here was sufficiently corroborated. The evidence supported the verdict of guilty, which, having the approval of the trial court, will not be disturbed by this court.
Retha Mae Parker was indicted with Sampson and Sallie Parker and separately tried and convicted of the offense of arson in the Superior Court of Screven County. The State proved the burning of certain buildings belonging to a private individual and used as a Negro church and school. Sampson Parker, an adopted son of Sallie and a foster brother of Retha Mae, confessed to the crime and testified in accordance with the confession in substance that Retha Mae had told him their mother wanted them to burn the church; that they had gone to the building with a can of kerosene; that he had poured the kerosene and the defendant had struck the fire; that they then returned home through the fields and the defendant tore her dress while crossing a fence. Tracks of two people were found in the vicinity of the fire, and at the fence. A piece of torn printed cotton cloth was found on the fence. Officers went to the defendant's home and found a skirt, which was damp, belonging to the defendant and which contained a tear matching that of the piece of cloth.
The defendant contended that she knew nothing about the crime but had torn her skirt on the fence during the afternoon when she and another witness were picking cherries and huckleberries; that they went by a spring and then crossed the fence on their way home. In rebuttal the State produced evidence that cherries and huckleberries were not ripe at that time in that vicinity; that the spring was also dry at that time, and that it had rained on the night in question sufficiently to wipe out the footprints by the fence if they had been made there during the afternoon, as contended by the defendant and her witness.
(After stating the foregoing facts.)
The trial court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.
Walton Usher, Solicitor-General, contra.
W. C. Hawkins, for plaintiff in error.
DECIDED JULY 14, 1952.
Saturday May 23 04:55 EDT


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Valid HTML 4.0!

Valid CSS!





Home - Tour - Disclaimer - Privacy - Contact Us
Copyright © 2000,2002,2004 Lawskills.com