Case ID: ga-app_10/html/0048-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Russell, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

3530.
    Rayfield v. The State.
    Decided November 7, 1911.
    Indictment for burglary; from Bibb superior court — Judge Felton.
    February 3, 1911.
    
      W. D. Nottingham, W. A. McClellan, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Walter J. Grace, solicitor-general, contra.
   Russell, J.

Where the undisputed evidence shows that the defendant was in possession of the stolen goods on the very night of the burglary, it is not prejudicial error requiring a new trial that the judge, in charging the jury as to the presumption raised from such possession, left out the word “recent.” The error in the charge was immaterial, and harmless as to the defendant.

2. The testimony of the accomplice was fully corroborated, and the verdict of guilty authorized. Judgment affirmed.