Brannon v. State

94 S.E. 759, 147 Ga. 499, 1917 Ga. LEXIS 294
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedDecember 14, 1917
DocketNo. 359
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 94 S.E. 759 (Brannon 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
Brannon v. State, 94 S.E. 759, 147 Ga. 499, 1917 Ga. LEXIS 294 (Ga. 1917).

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

A person was indicted for a crime. The solicitor-general made a formal motion for a change of venue, sedely on the ground that an impartial jury could not be obtained in the county where the crime was alleged to have been committed. The defendant resisted the motion, on the grounds: (1) That the court was without authority, over ' the objections of the defendant, to change the venue; (2) the passage of such an order would be in violation of art. 6, see. 16, par. 6, of the constitution of Georgia; (3) an impartial jury can be obtained in the county. On motion of the solicitor-general the first and second grounds of objection as just stated were stricken. Thereafter evidence was [500]*500heard from both sides,'upon conclusion of which the court passed an order changing the venue to another county. The defendant excepted, and assigned error on each of the rulings of the court. On the hearing before the Supreme Court, a motion was made to dismiss the bill of exceptions, on the ground that the judgment complained of is not a •final disposition of the case, nor final as to any party thereto. Held:

No. 359. December 14, 1917. Rehearing denied January 18, 1918. 'Indictment; from Quitman superior court. Pottle & Hofmayer, John B. Guerry,' and M. G. Edwards, for plaintiff in 'error. M. J. Yeomans, solicitor-general, pro tempore, confra.

1. The case was prematurely brought to the Supreme Court, and the motion to dismiss must prevail. Coleman v. George, 140 Ga. 619 (79 S. E. 543).

2. The reque'st for leave to file in the court below, as exceptions pendente lite, a copy of the original bill of exceptions will be denied. Burkhalter v. Roach, 145 Ga. 834 (90 S. E. 52).

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Moran v. State
1958 OK CR 112 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1958)
Robinson v. State
71 S.E.2d 677 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1952)
Lowe v. State
194 S.E. 527 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1937)
Hitchcock v. Hamilton
192 S.E. 726 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1937)
Todd v. Williford
142 S.E. 676 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1928)
Giles v. State
129 S.E. 12 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1925)
Avera v. State
128 S.E. 587 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1925)
Johnson v. Holmes
103 S.E. 157 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1920)
Smith v. Johnson
97 S.E. 856 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
94 S.E. 759, 147 Ga. 499, 1917 Ga. LEXIS 294, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brannon-v-state-ga-1917.