Gay v. State

110 S.E. 323, 28 Ga. App. 67, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 308
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 17, 1922
Docket13032
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 110 S.E. 323 (Gay 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
Gay v. State, 110 S.E. 323, 28 Ga. App. 67, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 308 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. The indictment upon which John Gay Sr. was convicted charged “ John Gay Sr. and John Gay Jr. with the offense of assault with intent to murder, for that the said accused on the 23d day of May in the year 1921, in the county aforesaid, with a gun and with a pistol, the same being weapons likely to produce death, did assault, shoot at, and shoot George Mercer and Wheeler Mercer and each of them, unlawfully, feloniously, with malice aforethought, and with the intent then and there to kill and murder each and both of the said persons so assaulted, contrary to the laws,” etc. By demurrer the indictment was attacked upon the ground that was not alleged which defendant held the gun or which one held the pistol, or which defendant did the shooting, or which defendant shot the respective parties alleged to have been shot and shot at, and that it was not alleged how or in what manner the two persons alleged to have been assaulted were assaulted. The demurrer was overruled. We see no error in the judgment overruling the demurrer. Under the indictment it would make no difference how or in what manner the persons were wounded, and it would make no difference which one of the defendants held the gun or the pistol, if they were acting in concert. It appears that the indictment is abundantly clear enough for the defendant to understand the crime with which he is charged and for the jury to comprehend the charge and issue on trial.

2. The charge of the court was full and fair and not subject to any of the criticisms urged against it. Upon conflicting evidence the jury were authorized to find the defendant guilty; and, since.this finding has the approval of the trial judge, it was not error,.for any reason assigned, to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

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

Related

Ramsey v. State
125 S.E. 777 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
110 S.E. 323, 28 Ga. App. 67, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 308, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gay-v-state-gactapp-1922.