Bell v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Bell v. State

101 S.E. 695, 24 Ga. App. 533, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 903

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 9, 1919

Docket10712

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 101 S.E. 695 (Bell 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

Bell v. State, 101 S.E. 695, 24 Ga. App. 533, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 903 (Ga. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. There is no merit in the motion of the State’s attorney to dismiss the bill of exceptions, and it is accordingly denied.

2. Where, after a plea of guilty has been entered and judgment and sentence pronounced in a criminal case, the defendant at the same term of the court files a written petition in which he asks that the judgment and sentence be vacated and that he be allowed to withdraw his plea of guilty and to enter a plea of not guilty, on the grounds that he entered his plea of guilty under a misapprehension of the facts of the case, and that he is really not guilty of the offense to which he pleaded guilty, and where the facts stated in his petition sustain these allegations, it is error for the trial judge to dismiss the petition on general demurrer.

Judgment reversed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. There is no merit in the motion of the State’s attorney to dismiss the bill of exceptions, and it is accordingly denied.

2. Where, after a plea of guilty has been entered and judgment and sentence pronounced in a criminal case, the defendant at the same term of the court files a written petition in which he asks that the judgment and sentence be vacated and that he be allowed to withdraw his plea of guilty and to enter a plea of not guilty, on the grounds that he entered his plea of guilty under a misapprehension of the facts of the case, and that he is really not guilty of the offense to which he pleaded guilty, and where the facts stated in his petition sustain these allegations, it is error for the trial judge to dismiss the petition on general demurrer.

Judgment reversed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 S.E. 695, 24 Ga. App. 533, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-v-state-gactapp-1919.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack