Butler v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Butler v. State

23 S.E. 822, 97 Ga. 404

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 27, 1896

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 23 S.E. 822 (Butler 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

Butler v. State, 23 S.E. 822, 97 Ga. 404 (Ga. 1896).

Pincite

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

1. Where, upon, being arraigned on an accusation in a city court, the accused waived being indicted by the grand jury, he cannot thereafter in that court withdraw this waiver, but must go to trial upon the accusation.

2. Although when such case was first called the accused declined to have counsel appointed to defend him and also waived his right to be tried by a jury, the court could, with propriety, upon a subsequent day appoint counsel for the accused; and when this was done, and such counsel promptly moved to withdraw the previous waiver of trial by jury, the motion should have been granted, it not appearing that the State’s counsel made any point as to delay, or otherwise insisted that the granting of the motion would result in any prejudice to the State. See Brown et al. v. The State, 89 Ga. 340, and authorities there cited. Judgment reversed.

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

Atkinson, J.

1. Where, upon, being arraigned on an accusation in a city court, the accused waived being indicted by the grand jury, he cannot thereafter in that court withdraw this waiver, but must go to trial upon the accusation.

2. Although when such case was first called the accused declined to have counsel appointed to defend him and also waived his right to be tried by a jury, the court could, with propriety, upon a subsequent day appoint counsel for the accused; and when this was done, and such counsel promptly moved to withdraw the previous waiver of trial by jury, the motion should have been granted, it not appearing that the State’s counsel made any point as to delay, or otherwise insisted that the granting of the motion would result in any prejudice to the State. See Brown et al. v. The State, 89 Ga. 340, and authorities there cited. Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 S.E. 822, 97 Ga. 404, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/butler-v-state-ga-1896.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack