Charles v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Charles v. State

13 S.E.2d 44, 64 Ga. App. 265, 1941 Ga. App. LEXIS 4

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 20, 1941

Docket28638.

StatusPublished

This text of 13 S.E.2d 44 (Charles 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

Charles v. State, 13 S.E.2d 44, 64 Ga. App. 265, 1941 Ga. App. LEXIS 4 (Ga. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. “In an act to regulate and prescribe certain matters of review procedure and practice in the courts of this State, approved August 21, 1911 (Acts 1911, p. 149), it is declared that no judgment of a trial court in a criminal ease shall be reversed by the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals for lack of proof of venue, save where the particular point has been specifically raised by a ground of the original or amended motion for a new trial. In the present case the particular point, that there was no proof of venue of the crime alleged to have been committed, was not raised by any ground of the original or amended motion.” Marshman v. State, 138 Ga. 864 (2) (76 S. E. 572) ; Fowler v. State, 189 Ga. 733, 736 (8 S. E. 2d, 77) ; Faulk v. State, 56 Ga. App. 13 (192 S. E. 70).

2. In the instant case the lack of proof of venue was not specifically raised by any ground of the motion for new trial, and therefore that question is not presented to this court. The general and special grounds of the motion are not argued or insisted on in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, and are therefore treated as abandoned.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Gardner, JJ., concur. *266 John A. Boykin, solicitor-general, J. W. LeCraw, E. E. Andrews, contra.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. “In an act to regulate and prescribe certain matters of review procedure and practice in the courts of this State, approved August 21, 1911 (Acts 1911, p. 149), it is declared that no judgment of a trial court in a criminal ease shall be reversed by the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals for lack of proof of venue, save where the particular point has been specifically raised by a ground of the original or amended motion for a new trial. In the present case the particular point, that there was no proof of venue of the crime alleged to have been committed, was not raised by any ground of the original or amended motion.” Marshman v. State, 138 Ga. 864 (2) (76 S. E. 572) ; Fowler v. State, 189 Ga. 733, 736 (8 S. E. 2d, 77) ; Faulk v. State, 56 Ga. App. 13 (192 S. E. 70).

2. In the instant case the lack of proof of venue was not specifically raised by any ground of the motion for new trial, and therefore that question is not presented to this court. The general and special grounds of the motion are not argued or insisted on in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, and are therefore treated as abandoned.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Gardner, JJ., concur. *266 John A. Boykin, solicitor-general, J. W. LeCraw, E. E. Andrews, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 S.E.2d 44, 64 Ga. App. 265, 1941 Ga. App. LEXIS 4, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charles-v-state-gactapp-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack