Daniels v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Daniels v. State

63 S.E. 583, 5 Ga. App. 472, 1909 Ga. App. LEXIS 28

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Daniels v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 8 Ga. App. 469 →

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided January 27, 1909·No. 1537·Published

Opinion

Powell, J.

1. This court has jurisdiction of a writ of error from the city court of Spring-field. While in the act creating that court Springfield is referred to as a town, yet by the act of 1907 (Georgia Laws 1907, p. 923) this municipality was expressly declared by the legislature to be a city.

2. The evidence clearly shows that a larceny was committed, and raises a strong suspicion that the defendants, or some of them, were involved in the commission of the larceny; yet the circumstances adduced were not sufficient legally to connect any particular defendant with the crime. The conviction must therefore be set aside. Judgment reversed.

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

Powell, J.

1. This court has jurisdiction of a writ of error from the city court of Spring-field. While in the act creating that court Springfield is referred to as a town, yet by the act of 1907 (Georgia Laws 1907, p. 923) this municipality was expressly declared by the legislature to be a city.

2. The evidence clearly shows that a larceny was committed, and raises a strong suspicion that the defendants, or some of them, were involved in the commission of the larceny; yet the circumstances adduced were not sufficient legally to connect any particular defendant with the crime. The conviction must therefore be set aside. Judgment reversed.

Daniels v. State, 63 S.E. 583, 5 Ga. App. 472, 1909 Ga. App. LEXIS 28 (Ga. Ct. App. 1909).

Pincite

63 S.E. 583 (Daniels v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.