Akin v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Akin v. State

142 S.E. 697, 38 Ga. App. 128, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 82

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 10, 1928

Docket18753

StatusPublished

This text of 142 S.E. 697 (Akin v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Akin v. State, 142 S.E. 697, 38 Ga. App. 128, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 82 (Ga. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

The still in active operation on the defendant’s land, the finding of fifteen gallons of liquor in a barrel just above it, the evidence that the defendant carried to the still several buckets of water from a near by branch and two “turns of wood,” his flight on the approach of the officers, and his explanation that his boy induced him to go “over there,” all together abundantly sustain his conviction of manufacturing whisky; and this is true although there was evidence of his good character, and evidence that his son owned the still and was present at .the time. The court properly overruled the motion for a new trial based solely upon the usual general grounds. See Lindsay v. Slate, 32 Ga. App. 74 (122 S. E. 649), and cit.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Luke, J.

The still in active operation on the defendant’s land, the finding of fifteen gallons of liquor in a barrel just above it, the evidence that the defendant carried to the still several buckets of water from a near by branch and two “turns of wood,” his flight on the approach of the officers, and his explanation that his boy induced him to go “over there,” all together abundantly sustain his conviction of manufacturing whisky; and this is true although there was evidence of his good character, and evidence that his son owned the still and was present at .the time. The court properly overruled the motion for a new trial based solely upon the usual general grounds. See Lindsay v. Slate, 32 Ga. App. 74 (122 S. E. 649), and cit.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

142 S.E. 697, 38 Ga. App. 128, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 82, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/akin-v-state-gactapp-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack