Armond v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Armond v. State

88 S.E. 990, 18 Ga. App. 140, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 178

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 19, 1916

Docket7003

StatusPublished

This text of 88 S.E. 990 (Armond 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

Armond v. State, 88 S.E. 990, 18 Ga. App. 140, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 178 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Russell, C. J.

1. The decision in this case is controlled by the ruling •of the Supreme Court in Strickland v. State, 137 Ga. 1 (72 S. E. 260, 36 L. R. A. (N. S.) 115, 27 Ann. Cas. (1913B) 323). And since that decision was rendered in response to a request by this court for instructions as to the constitutionality of the act making it unlawful to carry a pistol without a license (Acts 1910, page 134), this court declines to present again the question of the constitutionality of that act.

2. Nor is it necessary to inquire whether that statute is in violation of the provision of the Federal constitution that “The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States,” not only because it is well settled that the manner of bearing arms of offense and defense may be regulated by the several States without infringing the constitutional right of citizens to have and bear arms, but also because the motion in arrest of judgment is insufficient to raise any such question as that the accused was not a resident or citizen of Georgia. Judgment affirmed.

Accusation of carrying pistol; from city court of Brunswick. October 7, 1915.

Franlc H. Harris, for plaintiff in error. A. H. Crovatt, solicitor, contra.

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

Russell, C. J.

1. The decision in this case is controlled by the ruling •of the Supreme Court in Strickland v. State, 137 Ga. 1 (72 S. E. 260, 36 L. R. A. (N. S.) 115, 27 Ann. Cas. (1913B) 323). And since that decision was rendered in response to a request by this court for instructions as to the constitutionality of the act making it unlawful to carry a pistol without a license (Acts 1910, page 134), this court declines to present again the question of the constitutionality of that act.

2. Nor is it necessary to inquire whether that statute is in violation of the provision of the Federal constitution that “The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States,” not only because it is well settled that the manner of bearing arms of offense and defense may be regulated by the several States without infringing the constitutional right of citizens to have and bear arms, but also because the motion in arrest of judgment is insufficient to raise any such question as that the accused was not a resident or citizen of Georgia. Judgment affirmed.

Accusation of carrying pistol; from city court of Brunswick. October 7, 1915.

Franlc H. Harris, for plaintiff in error. A. H. Crovatt, solicitor, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 S.E. 990, 18 Ga. App. 140, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 178, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/armond-v-state-gactapp-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack