Floyd v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Floyd v. State

207 S.E.2d 262, 132 Ga. App. 11, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1585

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 24, 1974

Docket49284

StatusPublished

This text of 207 S.E.2d 262 (Floyd 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

Floyd v. State, 207 S.E.2d 262, 132 Ga. App. 11, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1585 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Quillian, Judge.

The appellant was tried and convicted of interference with custody. An appeal was filed and the case is here for review. Held:

1. The appellant contends that there was a fatal variance between the allegata and probata because the indictment alleged that the appellant enticed the minor away from the lawful custody of June Elrod when at the time she was actually in the custody of Lenora Goodrum, a babysitter. This contention is without merit. The child was in June Elrod’s lawful custody and the fact that she had asked Lenora Goodrum to temporarily supervise the child would not affect this legal status of the child’s lawful custody. See in this connection Strouse v. Barron, 212 Ga. 777 (95 SE2d 791).

2. The remaining enumerations of error are without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., and Clark, J., concur. Weiner & Bazemore, Paul S. Weiner, for appellant. Edward E. McGarity, District Attorney, for appellee.

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

Quillian, Judge.

The appellant was tried and convicted of interference with custody. An appeal was filed and the case is here for review. Held:

1. The appellant contends that there was a fatal variance between the allegata and probata because the indictment alleged that the appellant enticed the minor away from the lawful custody of June Elrod when at the time she was actually in the custody of Lenora Goodrum, a babysitter. This contention is without merit. The child was in June Elrod’s lawful custody and the fact that she had asked Lenora Goodrum to temporarily supervise the child would not affect this legal status of the child’s lawful custody. See in this connection Strouse v. Barron, 212 Ga. 777 (95 SE2d 791).

2. The remaining enumerations of error are without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., and Clark, J., concur. Weiner & Bazemore, Paul S. Weiner, for appellant. Edward E. McGarity, District Attorney, for appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 S.E.2d 262, 132 Ga. App. 11, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/floyd-v-state-gactapp-1974.

Opinion

2. The remaining enumerations of error are without merit.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack