Taylor v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtMacIntyre, P. J.
1. “It is now unquestioned that a witness may testify that statements made over a telephone were statements of the accused, where the witness is able to recognize the voice.” 1 Wharton Criminal Ev. (11th. Ed.), § 267 (7), p. 330, 332, and § 267 (4), p. 330, 331. In the only special ground of the motion for a new trial the objection is raised that the testimony of the prosecutrix, who testified that she recognized the voice of the accused, was a conclusion and inadmissible. This ground is not meritorious. See, in this connection, People v. Strollo, 191 N. Y. 42 (83 N. E. 573); State v. Usher,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People v. . StrolloNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
- State v. UsherSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
- McClung v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1940
3Cited by10 opinions
- Willingham v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
- State v. ColemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- Williams v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
- Favors v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1983
- Jenkins v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1983
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.