DuBose v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

DuBose v. State

143 S.E. 150, 38 Ga. App. 130, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 85

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 10, 1928

Docket18758

StatusPublished

This text of 143 S.E. 150 (DuBose 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

DuBose v. State, 143 S.E. 150, 38 Ga. App. 130, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 85 (Ga. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

An essential element of tlie.offense of violating tlie “labor-contract act” (section 715 of the Penal Code), and one which the State must prove, is that the accused, at the time he received the money or other thing of value in consideration of the making of the contract, had formed the deliberate and fraudulent intent to cheat and swindle the other party to the contract. Mulkey v. State, 1 Ga. App. 521 (57 S. E. 1022). Under this ruling and the facts of the instant case, the defendant’s conviction was unauthorized, and the refusal to grant him a new trial was error.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, G. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. U. J. Lawrence, for plaintiff in error. Wade H. Watson, solicitor, contra.

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

Luke, J.

An essential element of tlie.offense of violating tlie “labor-contract act” (section 715 of the Penal Code), and one which the State must prove, is that the accused, at the time he received the money or other thing of value in consideration of the making of the contract, had formed the deliberate and fraudulent intent to cheat and swindle the other party to the contract. Mulkey v. State, 1 Ga. App. 521 (57 S. E. 1022). Under this ruling and the facts of the instant case, the defendant’s conviction was unauthorized, and the refusal to grant him a new trial was error.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, G. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. U. J. Lawrence, for plaintiff in error. Wade H. Watson, solicitor, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 S.E. 150, 38 Ga. App. 130, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 85, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dubose-v-state-gactapp-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack