Foreman v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Foreman v. State

82 S.E. 354, 14 Ga. App. 815, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 466

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 21, 1914

Docket5738

StatusPublished

This text of 82 S.E. 354 (Foreman 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

Foreman v. State, 82 S.E. 354, 14 Ga. App. 815, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 466 (Ga. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Wade, J.

It is contended that there was no evidence authorizing the conviction of the defendant on the charge of carrying a concealed weapon. The witness Johnson-testified that the defendant climbed over a fence, on the left side of the witness, and he then saw a pistol in the right-hand pants pocket of the defendant; that he did not and could not see the pistol after the defendant got over the fence, until the defendant reached his buggy and turned around to get into the buggy, when the witness again saw the pistol; that he could not see the pistol before the defendant got over the fence, but saw it when the defendant raised his coat in getting over the fence, and after the defendant got over the fence he could not see the pistol, because it was hidden by the defendant’s coat. There was testimony in behalf of the defendant to the effect that he carried the pistol in an open manner and fully exposed to view, in a pocket where it could be seen at all times. The jury, however, had the right to determine which testimony they would believe, and their conclusion in the matter is binding on this court, since, as appears above, there was sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict. Judgment affirmed.

Roan, J., absent.

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

Wade, J.

It is contended that there was no evidence authorizing the conviction of the defendant on the charge of carrying a concealed weapon. The witness Johnson-testified that the defendant climbed over a fence, on the left side of the witness, and he then saw a pistol in the right-hand pants pocket of the defendant; that he did not and could not see the pistol after the defendant got over the fence, until the defendant reached his buggy and turned around to get into the buggy, when the witness again saw the pistol; that he could not see the pistol before the defendant got over the fence, but saw it when the defendant raised his coat in getting over the fence, and after the defendant got over the fence he could not see the pistol, because it was hidden by the defendant’s coat. There was testimony in behalf of the defendant to the effect that he carried the pistol in an open manner and fully exposed to view, in a pocket where it could be seen at all times. The jury, however, had the right to determine which testimony they would believe, and their conclusion in the matter is binding on this court, since, as appears above, there was sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict. Judgment affirmed.

Roan, J., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 S.E. 354, 14 Ga. App. 815, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 466, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foreman-v-state-gactapp-1914.