Duke v. State
This text of 79 S.E. 861 (Duke 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.
Opinion
1. It not appearing that the original records had been lost or destroyed or were otherwise inaccessible, it was error to permit parol proof of the contents of the defendant’s plea in a civil case, and likewise error to permit a witness to state the judgment rendered in the proceedings. A plea of minority on the part of a defendant must necessarily [709]*709have been in writing, and the announcement of a justice of the peace, in open court, that he will render judgment in a particular way is brutum fulmén until the judgment is actually entered upon the docket. Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Ry. v. Brown, 3 Ga. App. 561 (1 b) (60 S. E. 319).
2. Objections to the form of a criminal accusation can not be considered upon assignments of error presented as grounds of a motion for a new trial. Mayor &c. of Dublin v. Dudley, 2 Ga. App. 763 (59 S. E. 84).
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
79 S.E. 861, 13 Ga. App. 708, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/duke-v-state-gactapp-1913.