Arthur v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Arthur v. State

163 S.E.2d 752, 118 Ga. App. 350, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 1391

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 16, 1968

Docket43852, 43879, 43880

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 163 S.E.2d 752 (Arthur 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

Arthur v. State, 163 S.E.2d 752, 118 Ga. App. 350, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 1391 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Hall, Judge.

The defendant appeals from three convictions for passing forged checks for each of which he was convicted by the jury and sentenced for two years with a recommendation for 'misdemeanor punishment, the trial court entering a sentence of 12 months on each conviction.

The alleged criminal acts were passing checks “knowing the same to have been . . . forged.” Code Ann. § 26-3910. Irrespective of other issues, the circumstantial evidence presented to prove the essential ingredient of the crime, that the defendant passed the checks or knew the checks were forged, was insufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis except the guilt of the accused. Therefore the conviction must be [351]*351reversed. Code § 38-109; Harris v. State, 19 Ga. App. 741 (92 SE 224); Parise v. State, 92 Ga. App. 598 (89 SE2d 673); Purser v. State, 104 Ga. App. 728, 731 (122 SE2d 749); Brown v. State, 117 Ga. App. 827 (162 SE2d 254).

Submitted September 5, 1968 Decided September 16, 1968. Thomas M. Odom, for appellant.

Judgment reversed.

Bell, P. J., and, Quillian, J., concur.

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

Hall, Judge.

The defendant appeals from three convictions for passing forged checks for each of which he was convicted by the jury and sentenced for two years with a recommendation for 'misdemeanor punishment, the trial court entering a sentence of 12 months on each conviction.

The alleged criminal acts were passing checks “knowing the same to have been . . . forged.” Code Ann. § 26-3910. Irrespective of other issues, the circumstantial evidence presented to prove the essential ingredient of the crime, that the defendant passed the checks or knew the checks were forged, was insufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis except the guilt of the accused. Therefore the conviction must be [351]*351reversed. Code § 38-109; Harris v. State, 19 Ga. App. 741 (92 SE 224); Parise v. State, 92 Ga. App. 598 (89 SE2d 673); Purser v. State, 104 Ga. App. 728, 731 (122 SE2d 749); Brown v. State, 117 Ga. App. 827 (162 SE2d 254).

Submitted September 5, 1968 Decided September 16, 1968. Thomas M. Odom, for appellant.

Judgment reversed.

Bell, P. J., and, Quillian, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

163 S.E.2d 752, 118 Ga. App. 350, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 1391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arthur-v-state-gactapp-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack