Brown v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Brown v. State

139 S.E. 112, 37 Ga. App. 112, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 503

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 14, 1927

Docket18153

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 139 S.E. 112 (Brown 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

Brown v. State, 139 S.E. 112, 37 Ga. App. 112, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 503 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. Brown was convicted in the city court of Dublin of operating an automobile on the public highway leading from Roekledge to Dublin, while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The evidence showed that he “was driving that Eord truck on the public highway that leads from . . [Dublin] to Roekledge;” that “it is a public highway and leads across the river and on toward Roekledge, Ga.; it is a part of the highway system of this State;” and that while so driving he “was drunk.” See Long v. State, 32 Ga. App. 451 (124 S. E. 110). The evidence amply authorized the verdict.

[113]*113Decided July 14, 1927. W. A. Bampier, for plaintiff in error. J. A. Merritt, solicitor, contra.

2. Such grounds of the motion for a new trial as are approved by the trial judge are without merit; and, under the note of the trial judge approving the grounds of the amendment to the motion, the other grounds will not require a reversal. “Grounds of a motion for a new trial must have the unqualified approval of the trial judge.” Goolsby v. State, 35 Ga. App. 167 (2-a) (132 S. E. 245); Hammond v. State, 34 Ga. App. 234 (128 S. E. 918).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., oone.ur.

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

Luke, J.

1. Brown was convicted in the city court of Dublin of operating an automobile on the public highway leading from Roekledge to Dublin, while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The evidence showed that he “was driving that Eord truck on the public highway that leads from . . [Dublin] to Roekledge;” that “it is a public highway and leads across the river and on toward Roekledge, Ga.; it is a part of the highway system of this State;” and that while so driving he “was drunk.” See Long v. State, 32 Ga. App. 451 (124 S. E. 110). The evidence amply authorized the verdict.

[113]*113Decided July 14, 1927. W. A. Bampier, for plaintiff in error. J. A. Merritt, solicitor, contra.

2. Such grounds of the motion for a new trial as are approved by the trial judge are without merit; and, under the note of the trial judge approving the grounds of the amendment to the motion, the other grounds will not require a reversal. “Grounds of a motion for a new trial must have the unqualified approval of the trial judge.” Goolsby v. State, 35 Ga. App. 167 (2-a) (132 S. E. 245); Hammond v. State, 34 Ga. App. 234 (128 S. E. 918).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., oone.ur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 S.E. 112, 37 Ga. App. 112, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 503, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-state-gactapp-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack