Burden v. State

47 S.E. 562, 120 Ga. 198, 1904 Ga. LEXIS 500
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided May 10, 1904·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Evans, J.

1. The special assignment of error that the evidence showed that the accused merely acted as the agent of the buyer in getting the whisky he was charged with unlawfully selling, and did not make a sale thereof or have any interest whatever in it, is embraced in the general grounds of the motion for a new trial, wherein complaint is made that there was not sufficient evidence to warrant a conviction.

2. The conviction can not be held to be contrary to the evidence, it appearing that a witness for the State testified that he gave to the accused a certain sum of money, and a short while thereafter the accused delivered to him a quart of whisky, and it further appearing from the testimony of, another witness that the accused, when asked “what he sold that liquor for,” replied that he was drinking too much of it himself, and let the person to whom he was charged with selling it “have it to get rid of it.” Though the' ac- • cused, in his statement, undertook to explain that he acted merely as the agent of the purchaser and bought the whisky from a named person who had the reputation of running a “ blind tiger,” the judge who tried the case was warranted.in reaching the conclusion that the explanation offered by the accused was a mere subterfuge to cover up an illegal sale really made' by himself. Mack v. State, 116 Ga. 546.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Burden v. State, 47 S.E. 562, 120 Ga. 198, 1904 Ga. LEXIS 500 (Ga. 1904).

47 S.E. 562 (Burden v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. State
56 S.E. 73 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1906)
Taylor v. State
55 S.E. 474 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1906)