Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Ayers v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 23, 1990No. A89A1617Published

1ConcurrencePope, Judge

I concur in Division 1 and the result but I cannot agree with all that is said in Division 2. The State acknowledged that the testimony incidentally placed the defendant’s character in issue, but argued that the testimony was proper rebuttal pursuant to OCGA § 24-9-82. I cannot agree that the testimony was “wholly immaterial.” The defendant and his mother testified on direct examination that the victim’s mother just appeared “out of the blue” with the victim and began living in the defendant’s mother’s duplex house. The testimony offered by Detective Simons directly rebutted this and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Kraus v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1983

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API