Greggs v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Greggs v. State

87 S.E. 830, 17 Ga. App. 559, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 781

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 28, 1916

Docket7020

StatusPublished

This text of 87 S.E. 830 (Greggs 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

Greggs v. State, 87 S.E. 830, 17 Ga. App. 559, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 781 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Bkoyles, J.

Where the defendant was on trial for stealing the prosecutor’s hogs, and the evidence was that they were found dead and floating in a creek, and a witness testified that the defendant admitted he had shot and killed them hut that he thought they were wild hogs, it was reversible error for the court, in the presence and hearing of the jury, to ask the witness the following question: “What do people customarily do with wild hogs when they kill them — throw them in the creek, or leave them on the ground, or eat them, or what?” This question was calculated to give the jury the idea that the court thought [560]*560that the defendant’s defense was unreasonable, and, therefore, under section 105S of the Penal Code of 1910 (Civil Code, § 4863), requires a new trial. ' Judgment reversed.

Decided January 28, 1916.

Indictment lor larceny; from. Calhoun superior court — Judge Cox. October 8, 1915.

Smith & Miller, for plaintiff in error. R. 0. Bell, solicitor-general, F. A. Hooper, contra.

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

Bkoyles, J.

Where the defendant was on trial for stealing the prosecutor’s hogs, and the evidence was that they were found dead and floating in a creek, and a witness testified that the defendant admitted he had shot and killed them hut that he thought they were wild hogs, it was reversible error for the court, in the presence and hearing of the jury, to ask the witness the following question: “What do people customarily do with wild hogs when they kill them — throw them in the creek, or leave them on the ground, or eat them, or what?” This question was calculated to give the jury the idea that the court thought [560]*560that the defendant’s defense was unreasonable, and, therefore, under section 105S of the Penal Code of 1910 (Civil Code, § 4863), requires a new trial. ' Judgment reversed.

Decided January 28, 1916.

Indictment lor larceny; from. Calhoun superior court — Judge Cox. October 8, 1915.

Smith & Miller, for plaintiff in error. R. 0. Bell, solicitor-general, F. A. Hooper, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

87 S.E. 830, 17 Ga. App. 559, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 781, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greggs-v-state-gactapp-1916.