Clark v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Clark v. State

205 S.E.2d 71, 131 Ga. App. 68, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1329

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 25, 1974

Docket49108

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 205 S.E.2d 71 (Clark 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

Clark v. State, 205 S.E.2d 71, 131 Ga. App. 68, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1329 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Eberhardt, Presiding Judge.

In this appeal from conviction of three counts of simple battery (Criminal Code § 26-1304), where each count of the accusation provides that "the date alleged herein is an essential averment to this transaction,” the only issue in dispute is whether the batteries alleged in Counts 2 and 3 occurred on the dates specified therein. The evidence shows without dispute that the Count 3 battery occurred on April 21, 1973, as alleged, but that the Count 2 battery occurred after midnight of April 20, 1973, the date alleged in Count 2. Accordingly the judgment and sentence entered as to Count 2 must be reversed and vacated, and the judgment and sentence as to Counts 1 and 3 affirmed.

Judgment affirmed in part; reversed in part.

Pannell and Evans, JJ, concur.

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

Eberhardt, Presiding Judge.

In this appeal from conviction of three counts of simple battery (Criminal Code § 26-1304), where each count of the accusation provides that "the date alleged herein is an essential averment to this transaction,” the only issue in dispute is whether the batteries alleged in Counts 2 and 3 occurred on the dates specified therein. The evidence shows without dispute that the Count 3 battery occurred on April 21, 1973, as alleged, but that the Count 2 battery occurred after midnight of April 20, 1973, the date alleged in Count 2. Accordingly the judgment and sentence entered as to Count 2 must be reversed and vacated, and the judgment and sentence as to Counts 1 and 3 affirmed.

Judgment affirmed in part; reversed in part.

Pannell and Evans, JJ, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 S.E.2d 71, 131 Ga. App. 68, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clark-v-state-gactapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack