Hall v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hall v. State

246 S.E.2d 516, 146 Ga. App. 517, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2432

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 3, 1978

Docket55825

StatusPublished

This text of 246 S.E.2d 516 (Hall 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

Hall v. State, 246 S.E.2d 516, 146 Ga. App. 517, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2432 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Banke, Judge.

The defendant pled guilty to the charge of impersonating an officer and received a 2-year probated sentence. A condition of his probation was that he "not violate the criminal laws of any governmental unit.” His probation was revoked following a hearing where it was alleged that he had violated his probation by reckless driving, driving without tail lights, driving without no-fault insurance, driving too fast for conditions, and driving without a proper tag. The defendant pled guilty to all five offenses and was duly convicted.

Based on the above facts, we cannot say it was error for the trial judge to revoke defendant’s probation. See Christy v. State, 134 Ga. App. 504 (1) (215 SE2d 267) (1975); Gilbert v. State, 137 Ga. App. 754 (225 SE2d 86) (1976); White v. State, 138 Ga. App. 665 (227 SE2d 95) (1976); Johnson v. State, 142 Ga. App. 124 (235 SE2d 550) (1977).

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Smith, J., concur.

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

Banke, Judge.

The defendant pled guilty to the charge of impersonating an officer and received a 2-year probated sentence. A condition of his probation was that he "not violate the criminal laws of any governmental unit.” His probation was revoked following a hearing where it was alleged that he had violated his probation by reckless driving, driving without tail lights, driving without no-fault insurance, driving too fast for conditions, and driving without a proper tag. The defendant pled guilty to all five offenses and was duly convicted.

Based on the above facts, we cannot say it was error for the trial judge to revoke defendant’s probation. See Christy v. State, 134 Ga. App. 504 (1) (215 SE2d 267) (1975); Gilbert v. State, 137 Ga. App. 754 (225 SE2d 86) (1976); White v. State, 138 Ga. App. 665 (227 SE2d 95) (1976); Johnson v. State, 142 Ga. App. 124 (235 SE2d 550) (1977).

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Smith, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

246 S.E.2d 516, 146 Ga. App. 517, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2432, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hall-v-state-gactapp-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack