Home/Supreme Court of Georgia/Ballew v. State

Ballew v. State

170 S.E.2d 242, 225 Ga. 547, 1969 Ga. LEXIS 560
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 8, 1969
Docket25342
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 170 S.E.2d 242 (Ballew v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ballew v. State, 170 S.E.2d 242, 225 Ga. 547, 1969 Ga. LEXIS 560 (Ga. 1969).

Opinions

Grice, Justice.

Appellant was found guilty of robbery by force and was sentenced to a term of five years in the penitentiary.

His notice of appeal, in essential part, states merely: “Now comes [the appellant] and files this his appeal to the Supreme Court of Georgia.” Nowhere does the notice set forth “a concise statement of the judgment, ruling or order entitling the appellant to take an appeal.” Nor does it contain “a brief statement of the offense and the punishment prescribed,” as required in criminal cases. Hence, the notice of appeal does not satisfy the requirements of the Appellate Practice Act (Ga. L. 1965, pp. 18, 20; 1966, pp. 493, 495; Code Ann. § 6-802), and therefore must be dismissed.

[548]*548Submitted July 15, 1969 Decided September 8, 1969 Rehearing denied September 29, 1969. Irwin B. Kimzey, for appellant. Herbert B. Kimzey, District Attorney, Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General, Harold N. Hill, Jr., Executive Assistant Attorney General, Marion 0. Gordon, Assistant Attorney General, Larry H. Evans, for appellee.

A different result is not required because of the 1968 amendment to the Appellate Practice Act (Ga. L. 1968, pp. 1072, 1074-1075; Code Ann. § 6-809 (d)), which provides in material part that “Where it is apparent from the notice of appeal, the record, the enumeration of errors, or any combination of the foregoing, what judgment or judgments were appealed from or what errors are sought to be asserted upon appeal, the appeal shall be considered in accordance therewith notwithstanding that the notice of appeal fails to specify definitely the judgment appealed from. .

The situation here is not one provided for in the foregoing amendatory provision, where the notice of appeal fails “to specify definitely the judgment.” (Emphasis supplied.) Rather, it is a situation where the notice of appeal fails to specify any judgment whatever. See Head v. Gulf Oil Corp., 225 Ga. 21 (165 SE2d 658).

Appeal dismissed.

All the Justices concur, except Felton, J., who dissents.

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

Related

Zachery v. State
504 S.E.2d 466 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1998)
Bish v. State
501 S.E.2d 283 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1998)
Richardson v. General Motors Corp.
472 S.E.2d 143 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1996)
Brumby v. State
443 S.E.2d 613 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1994)
Ray v. Maxwell
403 S.E.2d 442 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1991)
Whiddon v. Stargell
386 S.E.2d 884 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
Seaton v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
376 S.E.2d 712 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1988)
Horton v. Allstate Insurance
320 S.E.2d 761 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1984)
Blackwell v. Cantrell
315 S.E.2d 29 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1984)
Fredericks v. State
308 S.E.2d 693 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1983)
Johnson v. Daniel
219 S.E.2d 579 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1975)
Thompson v. Consumer Credit of Valdosta, Inc.
180 S.E.2d 595 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1971)
Stewart v. Church
175 S.E.2d 46 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1970)
Hicks v. State
172 S.E.2d 453 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1970)
Ballew v. State
170 S.E.2d 242 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
170 S.E.2d 242, 225 Ga. 547, 1969 Ga. LEXIS 560, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ballew-v-state-ga-1969.