Harris v. State

111 S.E. 686, 28 Ga. App. 463, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 603
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided April 11, 1922·No. 13268·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Luke, J.

The defendant was charged with violating the prohibition statute. The evidence shows that in the house where the defendant lived, which was occupied also by other people, the officers found two pints of whisky concealed in a piano. The defendant was not at home, but was away at work at the time of the search. At the time of the search there were other people present in the house, and there is undisputed evidence that one of the other persons at the house on the same day was in possession of whisky and was engaged in the illicit sale of whisky. The evidence was not sufficient to authorize the defendant’s conviction: It was error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

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

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

Harris v. State, 111 S.E. 686, 28 Ga. App. 463, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 603 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

111 S.E. 686 (Harris v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jenkins v. State
179 S.E. 597 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
State v. Flint
269 P. 476 (Utah Supreme Court, 1928)
Harrell v. State
142 S.E. 746 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1928)
Marshall v. State
127 S.E. 618 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1925)
Wilson v. State
123 S.E. 623 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)