Court Opinion

ID: 9616372
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 04:46:04.043675+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:03:57.630108
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
On motion for rehearing, the appellant points out that the state has conceded, in a supplemental brief filed with this court, that the police witnesses did in fact examine their notes after the commencement of the trial. However, there is no contention that such a stipulation was made or sought in the trial court, nor have we otherwise been cited to any evidence of record which would have compelled the trial court to reach such a conclusion. “This court, as an appellate court, is empowered only to correct such errors of law as have been committed in the trial court and appear as a matter of record before that court. [Cits.]” Jones v. State, 169 Ga. App. 810, 811 (315 SE2d *56640) (1984). In any event, the documents in question have been transmitted to this court as part of the record on appeal, and our review of them convinces us that the court’s ruling could not, in any event, have been harmful to the appellant. Accord Johnson v. State, 259 Ga. 403, 405 (383 SE2d 118) (1989). Accordingly, we reaffirm our holding that the court’s ruling on this issue does not establish grounds for reversal of the appellant’s conviction. The motion for rehearing is denied.
Decided October 20, 1989
Rehearing denied November 17, 1989
Davis, Brofman, Zipperman & Kirschenbaum, E. Marcus Davis, Steven A. Suna, for appellant.
Thomas C. Lawler III, District Attorney, Debra K. Turner, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.