Opinion ID: 1111231
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Motions For J.N.O.V. and New Trial

Text: At the close of the State's case-in-chief, Gullett moved for a directed verdict, which the Circuit Court denied. After both parties had rested, Gullett renewed his motion for directed verdict. Following the jury verdict, Gullett moved for a j.n.o.v. and a new trial. Gullett now assigns as error the denial of these motions. We have held that a good bit of the evidence offered by the prosecution should not have been admitted at the trial below. This should not obscure the fact that Roger Lynn Hentz testified quite unequivocally that he made no confession to Gullett that he, Roger Lynn, killed Williamson. In cases such as this, where on appeal we hold that a part of the case for the prosecution should have been excluded, but where there is other, admissible evidence pointing substantially to guilt, the jurisprudentially sound course is to vacate the conviction and remand for a new trial. REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR A NEW TRIAL ROY NOBLE LEE, C.J., DAN M. LEE, P.J., and PRATHER, SULLIVAN, ANDERSON, GRIFFIN and ZUCCARO, JJ., concur. HAWKINS, P.J., concurs in part and dissents in part by separate written opinion.