Wims v. State, 4 S.E.2d 418 (Ga. Ct. App. 1939). · Go Syfert
Search
Wims v. State, 4 S.E.2d 418 (Ga. Ct. App. 1939). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
22 citation events (4 in the last 25 years) across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: In Re Hall County Grand Jury Proceedings (gactapp, 1985-06-27)
Treatment trajectory · 1940 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1940 1983 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" In Re Hall County Grand Jury Proceedings
Ga. Ct. App. · 1985 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally Howard v. State, 60 Ga. App. 229, 236 ( 4 SE2d 418 ) (1939).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Olsen v. State
Ga. · 2017 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Douglas Oil, supra, 441 U. S. at 219 (II); see also Howard v. State, 60 Ga. App. 229 ( 4 SE2d 418 ) (1939).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Olsen v. State
Ga. · 2017 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Douglas Oil, supra, 441 U. S. at 219 (II); see also Howard v. State, 60 Ga. App. 229 ( 4 SE2d 418 ) (1939).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
WIMS
v.
State
27676.
Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Sep 7, 1939.
4 S.E.2d 418
Robert Culpepper Jr., for plaintiff in error., Carl E. Crow, solicitor-general, Frank 8. Twitty, contra.
Broyles.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
Broyles, C. J.

The defendant was convicted of the offense of voluntary manslaughter. Her motion for new trial, containing the general grounds only, was overruled, and she excepted. On the trial she introduced no evidence, but made a statement in which she admitted cutting and killing the deceased, without intending to do so, and stated that the deceased attacked her first, hitting her with a brick, biting her on the shoulder, and threatening to kill her. It is well settled that the jury have the right to believe parts of a defendant’s statement and to disbelieve other parts. The evidence for the State and parts of the defendant’s statement authorized the jury to find that there was a mutual intent to fight by the defendant and the deceased; or that the defendant cut the deceased in the neck with a pocket-knife, under a sudden and irresistable passion caused by the assault upon her made by the deceased, and that the cutting of the deceased by the defendant was done with the intent to kill. “While there can be neither murder[*552] nor voluntary manslaughter without an intent to kill, yet where the weapon used was a pocket-knife, and the defendant stabbed the deceased in the neck with it, an intent to kill may be presumed.” Johnson v. State, 4 Ga. App. 59 (3) (60 S. E. 813). The verdict was authorized by the evidence and portions of the defendant’s statement, and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.