Fears v. State

54 S.E. 667, 125 Ga. 739, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 249
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided July 2, 1906·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Reck, J.

1. A ground of a motion for a new trial, after conviction in a misdemeanor case, that the fine imposed was excessive, is without merit. Hill v. State, 122 Ga. 166.

2. Where, in the trial of one charged with a misdemeanor, upon arraignment of the prisoner the indictment was read to him by the solicitor-general and a plea of not guilty was entered, no other or more formal arraignment 'was required. Penal Code, § 946; 12 Cye. 344, and citations.

3. The failure to furnish the accused or his counsel with a copy of the indictment and list of witnesses, in the absence of a demand therefor, does not constitute a valid ground for setting aside the verdict of guilty. Penal Code, §945.

4. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the court did not err in refusing a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Fish, G. J., absent. O. M. Duke, for plaintiff in error. O. H. B. ■Bloodworth, solicitor-general, and W. P. Bloodworth, contra.

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

Fears v. State, 54 S.E. 667, 125 Ga. 739, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 249 (Ga. 1906).

54 S.E. 667 (Fears v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McArthur v. State
312 S.E.2d 358 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1983)
Clark v. State
226 S.E.2d 89 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1976)
Rowland v. State
35 S.E.2d 372 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1945)
Annunciatio v. State
169 S.E. 3 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1933)
Horne v. State
109 S.E. 699 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1921)
Moore v. State
102 S.E. 916 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1920)