Legal Opinion

Goodson v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided April 16, 1926No. 5266PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHines, J.

1. A witness is always presumed to be competent. Adams v. Barrett, 3 Ga. 277.

2. When a witness is objected to on the ground that he is incompetent *179to testify, the question must, as a general rule, be decided by the court. Code (1910), § 5856; Dowdy v. Watson, 115 Ga. 42 (41 S. E. 266).

3. If, upon the preliminary examination, the witness appears to be competent, he should be permitted to testify; but if from the evidence his competency is doubtful, his competency depending upon a question of fact, and the court submits to the jury the determination of such fact, the jury should be instructed…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Eastlick v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  2. Estill v. Citizens & Southern BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
  3. Dowdy v. Watson & LewisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  4. Patterson v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
  5. Freeman v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1924

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Bland v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1953
  2. State v. WildmanOhio Supreme Court · 1945
  3. Scott v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1938
  4. Merneigh v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1971
  5. Knight v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1995

10 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