Hannah v. Lowry

Supreme Court of Georgia

Hannah v. Lowry

139 S.E. 798, 165 Ga. 103, 1927 Ga. LEXIS 311

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 12, 1927

DocketNo. 5878

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 139 S.E. 798 (Hannah v. Lowry) 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

Hannah v. Lowry, 139 S.E. 798, 165 Ga. 103, 1927 Ga. LEXIS 311 (Ga. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, J.

1. In this case it appears from the response of the sheriff to the writ of habeas corpus that the prisoner was held under a sentence valid upon its face; this being so, the court below properly remanded him to the custody of the sheriff and properly refused to discharge him upon an application for writ of habeas corpus.

2. So far as the applicant undertakes to show that the sentence was invalid because based upon a void accusation, this question can not be considered by this court, because the accusation and other parts of the record which were introduced in evidence were not brought to this court in proper form, the same being embraced in exhibits attached to the bill of exceptions which follow the certificate of the judge, and have not been otherwise identified by him. Waldrip v. Slagle, 161 Ga. 464 (131 S. E. 53). Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Hill, J.

1. In this case it appears from the response of the sheriff to the writ of habeas corpus that the prisoner was held under a sentence valid upon its face; this being so, the court below properly remanded him to the custody of the sheriff and properly refused to discharge him upon an application for writ of habeas corpus.

2. So far as the applicant undertakes to show that the sentence was invalid because based upon a void accusation, this question can not be considered by this court, because the accusation and other parts of the record which were introduced in evidence were not brought to this court in proper form, the same being embraced in exhibits attached to the bill of exceptions which follow the certificate of the judge, and have not been otherwise identified by him. Waldrip v. Slagle, 161 Ga. 464 (131 S. E. 53). Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 S.E. 798, 165 Ga. 103, 1927 Ga. LEXIS 311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hannah-v-lowry-ga-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack