Crudup v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Crudup v. State

382 S.E.2d 391, 191 Ga. App. 551, 1989 Ga. App. LEXIS 737

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 12, 1989

DocketA89A0732

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 382 S.E.2d 391 (Crudup 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

Crudup v. State, 382 S.E.2d 391, 191 Ga. App. 551, 1989 Ga. App. LEXIS 737 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Beasley, Judge.

Defendant appeals from his conviction of improper passing, OCGA § 40-6-42, arguing three enumerations all relating to his sentence.

Defendant was tried before the court and found guilty, granted a motion for new trial, tried by a jury and found guilty. Initially, he was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment, which was suspended, and $59.95 court costs.

The stipulated transcript of evidence of the second trial states: “the judge sentenced the Defendant to a 12 month suspended sentence upon payment of the $750 fine and a $50 statutory assessment.”

Defendant contends that this sentence violates the due process principle established in North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U. S. 711 (89 SC 2072, 23 LE2d 656) (1969). See Hewell v. State, 238 Ga. 578 (234 SE2d 497) (1977); Anthony v. Hopper, 235 Ga. 336 (219 SE2d 413) (1975); Pressley v. State, 158 Ga. App. 638 (281 SE2d 364) (1981).

There being nothing in the record to explain the additional fine, we are constrained to agree.

The case is remanded for reconsideration of the sentence so that it conforms with the law established in the foregoing cases.

Judgment affirmed with direction.

Carley, C. J., and McMurray, P. J., concur.

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