Carr v. Cook

Supreme Court of Georgia

Carr v. Cook

141 S.E. 202, 165 Ga. 472, 1928 Ga. LEXIS 12

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 11, 1928

DocketNo. 6354

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 141 S.E. 202 (Carr v. Cook) 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

Carr v. Cook, 141 S.E. 202, 165 Ga. 472, 1928 Ga. LEXIS 12 (Ga. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

The exception is to a judgment refusing to discharge the applicant from custody of the defendant, warden of the chain-gang, on a writ of habeas corpus. The warden justified his custody by showing two chain-gang sentences imposed upon the applicant for misdemeanor offenses. One was imposed by the city court and the other by the superior court of Miller County. Neither sentence made reference to the other. The sole question is whether the sentences, as a matter of law, were to be served concurrently or consecutively. If the former, both have been served and the applicant would be entitled to a discharge. -If the latter, the period of confinement has not expired. Held:

1. The court did not err in refusing to discharge the applicant. Hightower v. Hollis, 121 Ga. 159 (48 S. E. 969).

2. The request to review and overrule the case cited is denied.

Judgment affirmed.

All Vhe Justices concur.

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

Gilbert, J.

The exception is to a judgment refusing to discharge the applicant from custody of the defendant, warden of the chain-gang, on a writ of habeas corpus. The warden justified his custody by showing two chain-gang sentences imposed upon the applicant for misdemeanor offenses. One was imposed by the city court and the other by the superior court of Miller County. Neither sentence made reference to the other. The sole question is whether the sentences, as a matter of law, were to be served concurrently or consecutively. If the former, both have been served and the applicant would be entitled to a discharge. -If the latter, the period of confinement has not expired. Held:

1. The court did not err in refusing to discharge the applicant. Hightower v. Hollis, 121 Ga. 159 (48 S. E. 969).

2. The request to review and overrule the case cited is denied.

Judgment affirmed.

All Vhe Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

141 S.E. 202, 165 Ga. 472, 1928 Ga. LEXIS 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carr-v-cook-ga-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack