Gilbert v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Gilbert v. State

405 S.E.2d 498, 261 Ga. 425

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJuly 10, 1991

DocketS91A1054

StatusPublished

This text of 405 S.E.2d 498 (Gilbert v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gilbert v. State, 405 S.E.2d 498, 261 Ga. 425 (Ga. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Weltner, Justice.

The superior court entered an order affirming Gilbert’s conviction of driving under the influence of alcohol pursuant to OCGA § 40-13-28 and imposed sentence. In Walton v. State, 261 Ga. 392, 394 (405 SE2d 29) (1991), we stated:

If the conviction is properly supported by the evidence, the conviction would stand; if not, an acquittal would be required. The superior court would not, however, make an independent finding of guilt or innocence based on the evidence submitted, as would be done were the appeal, in fact, de novo.

Accordingly, the superior court was without authority to alter the sentence of the probate court.

Judgment reversed and case remanded.

All the Justices concur. [426]*426Decided July 10, 1991. Virgil L. Brown & Associates, Virgil L. Brown, Eric D. Hearn, Bentley C. Adams III, for appellant. W. Fletcher Sams, District Attorney, Randall K. Coggin, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

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

Weltner, Justice.

The superior court entered an order affirming Gilbert’s conviction of driving under the influence of alcohol pursuant to OCGA § 40-13-28 and imposed sentence. In Walton v. State, 261 Ga. 392, 394 (405 SE2d 29) (1991), we stated:

If the conviction is properly supported by the evidence, the conviction would stand; if not, an acquittal would be required. The superior court would not, however, make an independent finding of guilt or innocence based on the evidence submitted, as would be done were the appeal, in fact, de novo.

Accordingly, the superior court was without authority to alter the sentence of the probate court.

Judgment reversed and case remanded.

All the Justices concur. [426]*426Decided July 10, 1991. Virgil L. Brown & Associates, Virgil L. Brown, Eric D. Hearn, Bentley C. Adams III, for appellant. W. Fletcher Sams, District Attorney, Randall K. Coggin, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

405 S.E.2d 498, 261 Ga. 425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilbert-v-state-ga-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack