Burkhalter v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Burkhalter v. State

132 S.E. 651, 35 Ga. App. 242, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 660

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 14, 1926

Docket17081

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 132 S.E. 651 (Burkhalter 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

Burkhalter v. State, 132 S.E. 651, 35 Ga. App. 242, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 660 (Ga. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

The charge of the court complained of was not error, and the verdict was authorized by the evidence. The particular facts of the ease distinguish it from Toney v. State, 30 Ga. App. 61 (116 S. E. 550), and the other cases cited in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, there being no positive evidence in the instant case that any person, except the defendant, his wife and children, lived in the house where the whisky was found. The jury had a right to disbelieve the defendant’s statement that “another party lived there.”

Judgment affirmed.

Luke, J., concurs. Bloodworth, J., not participating, on account of illness. EL. LL. Elders, for plaintiff in error. M. IF. Eason, solicitor, contra.

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

Broyles, C. J.

The charge of the court complained of was not error, and the verdict was authorized by the evidence. The particular facts of the ease distinguish it from Toney v. State, 30 Ga. App. 61 (116 S. E. 550), and the other cases cited in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, there being no positive evidence in the instant case that any person, except the defendant, his wife and children, lived in the house where the whisky was found. The jury had a right to disbelieve the defendant’s statement that “another party lived there.”

Judgment affirmed.

Luke, J., concurs. Bloodworth, J., not participating, on account of illness. EL. LL. Elders, for plaintiff in error. M. IF. Eason, solicitor, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 S.E. 651, 35 Ga. App. 242, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burkhalter-v-state-gactapp-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack