Blankenship v. State
Opinion
The defendant was indicted and convicted of burglary. He filed a motion for new trial which was overruled and the case is here on appeal. Held:
The trial judge instructed the jury: "Ladies and gentlemen, our law provides a person commits burglary when, without authority and with intent to commit a felony or theft therein he enters or remains within the dwelling house of another.” This charge is taken from the Criminal Code of Georgia §26-1601 (Ga. L. 1968, pp. 1249, 1287; Code Ann. §26-1601), which did not become effective until July 1, 1969. The alleged burglary took place on November 1, 1967. The 1968 Act repealed Code § 26-2401 and removed the element of breaking from the crime. Thus, the trial judge should have charged the elements of bur[497] glary as defined by Code § 26-2401 which was in effect at the time the alleged burglary was committed. The Criminal Code of Georgia § 26-103 (Ga. L. 1968, pp. 1249, 1260; Code Ann. § 26-103); Ponder v. State, 121 Ga. App. 788, 789 (175 SE2d 55).
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
181 S.E.2d 544 (Blankenship v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.