This is an appeal from the defendant's conviction of two offenses, simple battery and attempted escape. During the trial there was a co-defendant who is not before this court on appeal. Held:
1. Enumeration of error 7 complains of the following portion of the charge: "Now ladies and gentlemen, after a careful consideration of all the evidence, facts and circumstances of these cases, giving both the defendants' statements such weight and credit as you think it is entitled to receive, they are entitled to receive, under the rules of law I have given you in charge, if you do not believe beyond a reasonable doubt that these defendants committed any of the crimes for which they are charged taking each case individually for separate consideration, it would be your duty to find the defendant guilty and the form of your verdict would be, 'We the jury find the defendant guilty.' Whatever case you so determine. if on the other hand, after a careful consideration of all the evidence, facts and circumstances in these cases again giving both the defendants' statements such weight and credit as you think they are entitled to receive, under the rules of law I have given you in charge, you do not believe beyond a reasonable doubt that these defendants committed the crimes for which they are charged, it would then be your duty to acquit the defendants and the form of your verdict in each case would be, 'We the jury find the defendant not guilty.' " (Emphasis supplied.)
It is contended that the charge "as given would direct the jury to find the defendant guilty if the State did not prove its case and was at least confusing." The charge by including the italicized word "not" was clearly subject to the objection made. Brewer v. Covington, 104 Ga. App. 857
, 858 (123 SE2d 343
); Eastern Dehydrating Co. v. Brown, 112 Ga. App. 349 (1) (145 SE2d 274)
2. Enumeration of error 4 complains that the court erred in failing to charge on self-defense. There was no evidence to sustain such contention. "The court did not err in failing to charge the defendant's contention that he shot in self-defense, since this contention was supported solely by the defendant's unsworn statement and not by any evidence." Wilson v. State, 215 Ga. 672 (5)
, supra. See Ryder v. State, 121 Ga. App. 796 (4) (175 SE2d 882)
3. The remaining enumerations of error are either deemed abandoned under Rule 17 (c 2) of this court, or are not likely to recur upon the retrial.
Wilson P. Darden, Solicitor, for appellee.