Clifton v. State

133 S.E. 287, 35 Ga. App. 399, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 396
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided May 12, 1926·No. 17277·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinions

Pee Cueiam.

1. The general demurrer to the indictment was properly overruled.

2. Conceding that the court erred in overruling the special demurrer, it clearly appears from the record that the error was harmless, since the accused was already in possession of the very information called for by the demurrer. See Wrightsville & Tennille R. Co. v. Vaughan, 9 Ga. App. 371 (5) (71 S. E. 691).

3. It appears from the record that the ordinary of Lee county, Georgia, had jurisdiction to appoint the accused guardian for John J. Curry, that [400]*400tlie verdict was authorized by the evidence, and that none of the grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial show cause for a reversal of the judgment overruling the motion.

Decided May 12, 1926. B. B. Forrester, Zach. Childers, Wallis & Fort, for plaintiff in error. Jule Felton, solicitor-general, E. L. Forrester, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworih, J., concur. Luke, J., dissents.

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

Clifton v. State, 133 S.E. 287, 35 Ga. App. 399, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 396 (Ga. Ct. App. 1926).

133 S.E. 287 (Clifton v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Eubanks
238 S.E.2d 38 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1977)
Stull v. State
196 S.E.2d 7 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1973)
Nathan v. Duncan
149 S.E.2d 383 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1966)
Teal v. Equitable Loan Co.
159 S.E. 904 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1931)