Pittman v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Smith, Judge.
We affirm appellant’s conviction of credit card theft.
1. Appellant raised no objection to the manner of conducting voir dire or to the admission of state’s exhibit 1, and thus he will not be heard to raise appellate contentions about those matters. Sanders v. State, 134 Ga. App. 825 (1) (216 SE2d 371) (1975).
2. The court’s charges on recent possession and on the jury’s duty to reach a verdict were in accordance with the law. Carpenter v. State, 140 Ga. App. 368 (2) (231 SE2d 97) (1976); Hardy v. State, 242 Ga. 702 (4f) (251 SE2d 289) (1978). The enumerations of error concerning…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Heyward v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1976
- Talley v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1976
- Hardy v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1978
- Sanders v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
- Garrett v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1978
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Nicholson v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1995
- Cantrell v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
- Lane v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
- LaPann v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1983