Legal Opinion

Yeomans v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided June 27, 1967No. 42905PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Bell, Presiding Judge.

Defendant, having been tried and convicted of the offense of simple larceny, alleges that the court erred in refusing to allow two witnesses to testify where the rule for sequestration had been invoked and these witnesses had not been sworn and sequestered but remained in the courtroom and heard the testimony of the other witnesses. Held:

“Where witnesses have been separated at request of counsel, a person not sworn and sequestered, but who has remained in the courtroom and heard the testimony in the case, is still competent to testify as a witness in the cause. -If he…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Griffin v. HendersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
  2. Brown v. City of AtlantaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1880
  3. Palmer v. StevensCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967
  4. Hall v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947
  5. Taylor v. R.O.A. Motors, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1966

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Mahone v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1969
  2. Ingram v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1991
  3. Lockleer v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1978
  4. Pratt v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1993
  5. Daniels v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1981

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API