Court Opinion

ID: 9579347
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:54:14.966006+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:35:28.202283
License: Public Domain

Carley, Judge,
concurring specially.
I agree with all that is said in the majority opinion. With regard to Division 3, however, I would like to point out that even if the evidence excluded were competent, reversible error would not be shown in this case. “No matter how competent evidence might be, a new trial will not be granted merely because evidence has been excluded. It must appear that the excluded testimony was material and the substance of what the material evidence is must be called to the attention of the trial court at the time of its exclusion. [Cits.]” Campbell v. State, 149 Ga. App. 229, 300 (254 SE2d 389) (1979). The record in the instant case reveals that there was no proffer as to what the answer of the defendant would have been had the objection not been sustained. Accordingly, “[t]his enumeration presents nothing for review.” Campbell v. State, supra.