Davis v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Davis v. State

123 S.E.2d 271, 105 Ga. App. 5, 1961 Ga. App. LEXIS 554

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 20, 1961

Docket39221

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 123 S.E.2d 271 (Davis 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

Davis v. State, 123 S.E.2d 271, 105 Ga. App. 5, 1961 Ga. App. LEXIS 554 (Ga. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

Jordan, Judge.

The defendant, under an accusation charging him with the possession of “spirituous and intoxicating liquor, to wit: NTPW,” was tried and convicted in the City Court of Sandersville. His amended motion for new trial was denied, and he excepted to that judgment. Held:

1. Defects in an indictment or accusation must be taken advantage of by demurrer before trial or motion in arrest of judgment after conviction; they furnish no grounds for granting a new trial. Rucker v. State, 114 Ga. 13 (1) (39 SE 902). Accordingly, where an accusation charging the defendant with the possession of “spirituous and intoxicating liquor, to wit: NTPW” was not demurred to, and from the evidence it was abundantly clear that the defendant was being prosecuted for the possession of non-tax-paid liquor, it was not error for the trial court so' to charge the jury. Scandrett v. State, 124 Ga. 141 (2) (52SE160).

2. Under the evidence in this case, it was not error for the trial *6 court to charge the jury on the law of confessions. Brown v. State, 74 Ga. App. 880 (41 SE2d 912).

Decided November 20, 1961 Rehearing denied December 1, 1961. Casey Thigpen, for plaintiff in error. Thomas A. Hutcheson, Solicitor, contra.

3. The evidence authorized the verdict and the trial court did not err in denying the amended motion for new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Nichols, P. J., and Frankum, J., concur.

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

Jordan, Judge.

The defendant, under an accusation charging him with the possession of “spirituous and intoxicating liquor, to wit: NTPW,” was tried and convicted in the City Court of Sandersville. His amended motion for new trial was denied, and he excepted to that judgment. Held:

1. Defects in an indictment or accusation must be taken advantage of by demurrer before trial or motion in arrest of judgment after conviction; they furnish no grounds for granting a new trial. Rucker v. State, 114 Ga. 13 (1) (39 SE 902). Accordingly, where an accusation charging the defendant with the possession of “spirituous and intoxicating liquor, to wit: NTPW” was not demurred to, and from the evidence it was abundantly clear that the defendant was being prosecuted for the possession of non-tax-paid liquor, it was not error for the trial court so' to charge the jury. Scandrett v. State, 124 Ga. 141 (2) (52SE160).

2. Under the evidence in this case, it was not error for the trial *6 court to charge the jury on the law of confessions. Brown v. State, 74 Ga. App. 880 (41 SE2d 912).

Decided November 20, 1961 Rehearing denied December 1, 1961. Casey Thigpen, for plaintiff in error. Thomas A. Hutcheson, Solicitor, contra.

3. The evidence authorized the verdict and the trial court did not err in denying the amended motion for new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Nichols, P. J., and Frankum, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 S.E.2d 271, 105 Ga. App. 5, 1961 Ga. App. LEXIS 554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-state-gactapp-1961.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack