Gunter v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Gunter v. State

109 S.E. 916, 28 Ga. App. 38, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 473

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 15, 1921

Docket12958

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 109 S.E. 916 (Gunter 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

Gunter v. State, 109 S.E. 916, 28 Ga. App. 38, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 473 (Ga. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

The defendant was jointly indicted with his father and two other persons, for the offense of manufacturing liquor, and was convicted. He complains solely upon the ground that the evidence did not authorize his conviction. The evidence authorized the jury to believe that the defendant was present at a still with his father and two other persons, eating dinner near the still, while there was a ñre in the furnace and whisky was running from the still, that at the still there were about 35 gallons of whisky in a barrel, and that when the officers approached the spot the defendant, his father, and the others fled, and they were [39]*39later apprehended. We cannot say that the conviction was without evidence to authorize it. The verdict having the approval of the trial judge, it was not error 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

Luke, J.

The defendant was jointly indicted with his father and two other persons, for the offense of manufacturing liquor, and was convicted. He complains solely upon the ground that the evidence did not authorize his conviction. The evidence authorized the jury to believe that the defendant was present at a still with his father and two other persons, eating dinner near the still, while there was a ñre in the furnace and whisky was running from the still, that at the still there were about 35 gallons of whisky in a barrel, and that when the officers approached the spot the defendant, his father, and the others fled, and they were [39]*39later apprehended. We cannot say that the conviction was without evidence to authorize it. The verdict having the approval of the trial judge, it was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 S.E. 916, 28 Ga. App. 38, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 473, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gunter-v-state-gactapp-1921.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack