Cheatham v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Cheatham v. State

8 S.E.2d 689, 62 Ga. App. 503, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 318

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 10, 1940

Docket28292.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 8 S.E.2d 689 (Cheatham 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

Cheatham v. State, 8 S.E.2d 689, 62 Ga. App. 503, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 318 (Ga. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Guerry, J.

The evidence for the State tended to show that the defendant received the goods at his- home. The prosecutor’s home, from which the goods were stolen, was on the western side of Madison County. The defendant’s home was one mile to the north. Jackson County is west of Madison County. Hnder this evidence the home of the defendant could be in another county, and not in Jackson or Madison. The evidence may have warranted a finding that it was not in Jackson County, but it did not exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that it was in Madison County. Although the language used in Bryant v. State, 80 Ga. 272, 275 (4 S. E. 853), may support the contention that, where no particular issue is made, a jury of the vicinage may be presumed to know locations, we think older and later decisions of the Supreme Court and of this court have fixed the rule in respect to the proof of venue. Dickerson v. State, 186 Ga. 557 (199 S. E. 142); Williamson v. State, 58 Ga. App. 389 (198 S. E. 552).

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, C. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

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

Guerry, J.

The evidence for the State tended to show that the defendant received the goods at his- home. The prosecutor’s home, from which the goods were stolen, was on the western side of Madison County. The defendant’s home was one mile to the north. Jackson County is west of Madison County. Hnder this evidence the home of the defendant could be in another county, and not in Jackson or Madison. The evidence may have warranted a finding that it was not in Jackson County, but it did not exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that it was in Madison County. Although the language used in Bryant v. State, 80 Ga. 272, 275 (4 S. E. 853), may support the contention that, where no particular issue is made, a jury of the vicinage may be presumed to know locations, we think older and later decisions of the Supreme Court and of this court have fixed the rule in respect to the proof of venue. Dickerson v. State, 186 Ga. 557 (199 S. E. 142); Williamson v. State, 58 Ga. App. 389 (198 S. E. 552).

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, C. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 S.E.2d 689, 62 Ga. App. 503, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 318, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cheatham-v-state-gactapp-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack