Skip to main content

Ingram v. State

Citations

  • 287 S.E.2d 304
  • 160 Ga. App. 300
  • 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 3214

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that “Possession (of stolen property) alone is not sufficient to show guilty knowledge”
  • finding that evidence that the ear was in appellant’s yard, striped of its parts, with the vehicle identification number scratched out, was sufficient to suggest guilty knowledge
  • “Since appellant requested the recharge and took no exception to it, he cannot now claim the recharge was error, as induced error is impermissible.”
  • “Possession (of stolen property) alone is not sufficient to show guilty knowledge; however, possession together with other circumstances and evidence may be used to infer the knowledge required by the statute. . . . [Cit.]”
  • sufficient evidence of knowledge that car was stolen where two cars found on defendant’s property had been stripped of many parts, the VIN had been scraped from the doors of one, and the motor from one car was in defendant’s personal car

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Sognier, Shulman, Birdsong

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.