Beaty v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Beaty v. State

79 S.E.2d 831, 89 Ga. App. 478, 1954 Ga. App. LEXIS 487

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 9, 1954

Docket34930

StatusPublished

This text of 79 S.E.2d 831 (Beaty 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

Beaty v. State, 79 S.E.2d 831, 89 Ga. App. 478, 1954 Ga. App. LEXIS 487 (Ga. Ct. App. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

Carlisle, J.

1. Under Code § 67-9909, “Any person who shall, in the sale or disposing of an3'’ property, cither real or personal, defraud another by falsely representing that such property is not subject to any lien, knowing the same to be subject thereto, . . . shall be punished as for a misdemeanor.” Whore the State, upon the trial of one indicted under the foregoing section of the Code, introduced evidence from which the jury was authorized to find that the defendant knowingly sold the prosecutor an automobile upon which there was a prior recorded chattel mortgage, falsely representing to the prosecutor that there were no prior liens on the property, and the prosecutor was forced to pay the chattel mortgage off in order to regain possession of the automobile, a verdict finding the defendant guilty as charged is authorized by the evidence. French v. State, 4 Ga. App. 462 (61 S. E. 836); Connor v. State, 8 Ga. App. 688 (70 S. E. 45); Bolton v. State, 43 Ga. App. 759 (159 S. E. 910); Tribble v. State, 33 Ga. App. 370 (126 S. E. 272); Brown v. State, 6 Ga. App. 329 (64 S. E. 1001).

2. The defendant’s contention, that the court’s use of the word “tliinlc” instead of “believe” in the following excerpt from the charge was erroneous and harmful to the defendant, is without merit: “Now I tell you again that the burden is on the Slate to prove the material allegations of this indictment beyond a reasonable doubt before you would convict this defendant. If you think the State has done that your verdict should be: ‘We, the jury, find the defendant guilty.’ On the other hand if you believe the contentions of the defendant or believe the State has not made out a case beyond a reasonable doubt, then, in that event, you would find a verdict for the defendant and the form of your verdict would be: ‘Wo, the jury, find the defendant not guilty.’ ” Connotatively, the words are synonymous in this charge.

The trial court did not err in denying the motion for -new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Gardner, P. J., and Townsend, J., concur. John Henry Poole, for plaintiff in error. J. Bowie Gray, Solicitor-General, contra.

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

Carlisle, J.

1. Under Code § 67-9909, “Any person who shall, in the sale or disposing of an3'’ property, cither real or personal, defraud another by falsely representing that such property is not subject to any lien, knowing the same to be subject thereto, . . . shall be punished as for a misdemeanor.” Whore the State, upon the trial of one indicted under the foregoing section of the Code, introduced evidence from which the jury was authorized to find that the defendant knowingly sold the prosecutor an automobile upon which there was a prior recorded chattel mortgage, falsely representing to the prosecutor that there were no prior liens on the property, and the prosecutor was forced to pay the chattel mortgage off in order to regain possession of the automobile, a verdict finding the defendant guilty as charged is authorized by the evidence. French v. State, 4 Ga. App. 462 (61 S. E. 836); Connor v. State, 8 Ga. App. 688 (70 S. E. 45); Bolton v. State, 43 Ga. App. 759 (159 S. E. 910); Tribble v. State, 33 Ga. App. 370 (126 S. E. 272); Brown v. State, 6 Ga. App. 329 (64 S. E. 1001).

2. The defendant’s contention, that the court’s use of the word “tliinlc” instead of “believe” in the following excerpt from the charge was erroneous and harmful to the defendant, is without merit: “Now I tell you again that the burden is on the Slate to prove the material allegations of this indictment beyond a reasonable doubt before you would convict this defendant. If you think the State has done that your verdict should be: ‘We, the jury, find the defendant guilty.’ On the other hand if you believe the contentions of the defendant or believe the State has not made out a case beyond a reasonable doubt, then, in that event, you would find a verdict for the defendant and the form of your verdict would be: ‘Wo, the jury, find the defendant not guilty.’ ” Connotatively, the words are synonymous in this charge.

The trial court did not err in denying the motion for -new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Gardner, P. J., and Townsend, J., concur. John Henry Poole, for plaintiff in error. J. Bowie Gray, Solicitor-General, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

79 S.E.2d 831, 89 Ga. App. 478, 1954 Ga. App. LEXIS 487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beaty-v-state-gactapp-1954.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack