2020 Georgia Code
Title 24 - Evidence
Chapter 6 - Witnesses
Article 1 - General Provisions

- Televising of testimony of child who is victim of certain offenses, § 17-8-55.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the provisions, decisions under former O.C.G.A. T. 24, C. 9, A. 3 are included in the annotations for this article.

- Examination of witnesses is a matter largely within the discretion of the court. National Land & Coal Co. v. Zugar, 171 Ga. 228, 155 S.E. 7 (1930) (decided under former Code 1933, § 33-1701 et seq.)

- Although a defendant has both a state and federal right to self-representation, when the defendant has counsel to represent the defendant, the trial court can require the examination and cross-examination of witnesses to be conducted by one counsel only. Johnson v. State, 246 Ga. 126, 269 S.E.2d 18 (1980) (decided under former Code 1933, § 33-1701 et seq.)

- Trial judge has the right to propound a question or series of questions to any witness for the purpose of developing fully the truth of the case; and the extent to which the examination conducted by the court shall go is a matter within the judge's discretion. Daniels v. State, 154 Ga. App. 323, 268 S.E.2d 376 (1980) (decided under former Code 1933, § 33-1701 et seq.)

Lengthy examination of a witness by the court will not be cause for a new trial unless the court during the examination of the witness expresses an opinion on the facts of the case or the examination becomes argumentative. Daniels v. State, 154 Ga. App. 323, 268 S.E.2d 376 (1980) (decided under former Code 1933, § 33-1701 et seq.)

- Trial judge's discretion extends to allowing the state to reopen the case and recall a witness for the purpose of amplifying testimony previously given, and to allowing a witness to be recalled after the close of evidence to correct the witness's former testimony, which the witness contends was mistaken. Flynt v. State, 153 Ga. App. 232, 264 S.E.2d 669, cert. denied, 449 U.S. 888, 101 S. Ct. 245, 66 L. Ed. 2d 114 (1980) (decided under former Code 1933, § 33-1701 et seq.)

It is within the discretionary power of the court to allow a witness to be sworn after the evidence on both sides has been announced closed and the argument has been commenced; and a liberal practice in this respect is most favorable to the ends of justice. Robinson v. State, 154 Ga. App. 591, 269 S.E.2d 86 (1980) (decided under former Code 1933, § 33-1701 et seq.)

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 81 Am. Jur. 2d, Witnesses, § 688.

Impeachment of Expert Witness - Financial Interest, 21 POF2d 73.

Expert Testimony at Sentencing, 21 POF2d 645.

Contradiction of Expert Witness Through Use of Authoritative Treatise, 31 POF2d 443.

Qualification of Medical Expert Witness, 33 POF2d 179.

Qualification of Chiropractor as Expert Witness, 45 POF2d 137.

Establishing an Adequate Foundation for Proof of Medical Expenses, 23 POF3d 243.

Corroboration of a Child's Sexual Abuse Allegation with Behavioral Evidence, 25 POF3d 189.

Challenge to Eyewitness Testimony Through Expert Testimony, 35 POF3d 1.

Proof of Contamination in Toxic Tort Cases Through Expert Testimony, 39 POF3d 539.

Damages for Loss of Enjoyment of Life, 49 POF3d 339.

Firearms Forensics - Firearms Identification at Trial, 60 POF3d 1.

Proof of Identity of Fiber, Fabric, or Textile, 61 POF3d 501.

Proof of Incompetency, 62 POF3d 197.

- Admissibility of evidence, and propriety and effect of questions, statements, comments, etc., tending to show that defendant in a personal injury or death action carries liability insurance, 56 A.L.R. 1418; 74 A.L.R. 849; 95 A.L.R. 388; 105 A.L.R. 1319; 4 A.L.R.2d 761.

Propriety of conduct of trial judge in propounding questions to witnesses in criminal case, 84 A.L.R. 1172.

Offering improper evidence, or asking improper question, as ground for new trial or reversal, 109 A.L.R. 1089.

Constitutionality, construction, and effect of statute or regulation relating specifically to divulgence of information acquired by public officers or employees, 165 A.L.R. 1302.

Claim of privilege by a witness as justifying the use in criminal case of his testimony given on a former trial or preliminary examination, 45 A.L.R.2d 1354.

Coaching of witness by spectator at trial as prejudicial error, 81 A.L.R.2d 1142.

Closed-circuit television witness examination, 61 A.L.R.4th 1155.

State statutes or regulations expressly governing disclosure of fact that person has tested positive for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), 12 A.L.R.5th 149.

Transmission or risk of transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) as basis for prosecution or sentencing in criminal or military discipline case, 13 A.L.R.5th 628.

Admissibility, after enactment of Rule 411, Federal Rules of Evidence, of evidence of liability insurance in negligence actions, 40 A.L.R. Fed. 541.