Gunn v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Gunn v. State

140 S.E. 524, 37 Ga. App. 333, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 656

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 15, 1927

Docket18427

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 140 S.E. 524 (Gunn 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

Gunn v. State, 140 S.E. 524, 37 Ga. App. 333, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 656 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

The defendant was charged with and convicted of being drunk on a public highway, which drunkenness “was made manifest by boisterousness, and by indecent condition and acting, and by vulgar, profane and unbecoming language, and loud and violent discourse.” The evidence failed to sustain theáe allegations of the indictment; and under the evidence as to the defendant’s condition it is not unreasonable to conclude that he did not go voluntarily upon the public highway, but was driven there by some one else and thereafter abandoned. The trial judge erred in overruling the motion for a new trial. See Reddick v. State, 35 Ga. App. 256 (132 S. E. 645); Howell v. State, 13 Ga. App. 74, 77, 78 (78 S. E. 859).

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, G. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

The defendant was charged with and convicted of being drunk on a public highway, which drunkenness “was made manifest by boisterousness, and by indecent condition and acting, and by vulgar, profane and unbecoming language, and loud and violent discourse.” The evidence failed to sustain theáe allegations of the indictment; and under the evidence as to the defendant’s condition it is not unreasonable to conclude that he did not go voluntarily upon the public highway, but was driven there by some one else and thereafter abandoned. The trial judge erred in overruling the motion for a new trial. See Reddick v. State, 35 Ga. App. 256 (132 S. E. 645); Howell v. State, 13 Ga. App. 74, 77, 78 (78 S. E. 859).

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, G. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

140 S.E. 524, 37 Ga. App. 333, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 656, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gunn-v-state-gactapp-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack