Brand v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Brand v. State

112 S.E. 829, 153 Ga. 639, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 136

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJune 15, 1922

DocketNo. 3183

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 112 S.E. 829 (Brand 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

Brand v. State, 112 S.E. 829, 153 Ga. 639, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 136 (Ga. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

1. Where an accusation is drawn under section 442 of the Penal Code (1910), and it is alleged therein that the accused appeared in an intoxicated condition upon a public street, “ which said drunkenness and intoxication was caused by the excessive use of intoxicating wines, beers, liquors, or opiates,” the words just quoted cannot be treated as surplusage.

2. It follows from what is stated above, that where the accusation alleges that the defendant’s drunkenness was caused by the excessive use of intoxicating wines, beers, liquors, or opiates, and the evidence shows that the defendant was drunk upon the highway, which was manifested by staggering, by boisterousness, and by the use of profane and unbecoming language, the allegation as to the cause of the drunkenness of the defendant must be shown and proved as all other material allegations of indictments or accusations must be proved. It is not necessary to enumerate the different ways in which this can be shown. It is sufficient to say that it must be proved by either direct or circumstantial testimony “ sufficient to satisfy the mind and conscience beyond a reasonable doubt.” Penal Code, § 1013.

All the Justices concur.

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

Gilbert, J.

1. Where an accusation is drawn under section 442 of the Penal Code (1910), and it is alleged therein that the accused appeared in an intoxicated condition upon a public street, “ which said drunkenness and intoxication was caused by the excessive use of intoxicating wines, beers, liquors, or opiates,” the words just quoted cannot be treated as surplusage.

2. It follows from what is stated above, that where the accusation alleges that the defendant’s drunkenness was caused by the excessive use of intoxicating wines, beers, liquors, or opiates, and the evidence shows that the defendant was drunk upon the highway, which was manifested by staggering, by boisterousness, and by the use of profane and unbecoming language, the allegation as to the cause of the drunkenness of the defendant must be shown and proved as all other material allegations of indictments or accusations must be proved. It is not necessary to enumerate the different ways in which this can be shown. It is sufficient to say that it must be proved by either direct or circumstantial testimony “ sufficient to satisfy the mind and conscience beyond a reasonable doubt.” Penal Code, § 1013.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

112 S.E. 829, 153 Ga. 639, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 136, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brand-v-state-ga-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack