Holmes v. State

147 S.E. 776, 39 Ga. App. 556, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 418
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided April 9, 1929·No. 19511·Published

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

The defendant was convicted, under section 720 of the Penal Code of 1910, of the wrongful sale of personal property which, it was charged, he had previously included in a bill of sale to a certain corporation. It was alleged in the indictment that the bill of sale was executed by the defendant, John Holmes, and Mrs. Victoria Holmes, whereas upon the trial the undisputed evidence disclosed that it was executed by Mrs. Victoria Holmes alone. The allegation as to the execution of the bill of sale being essential, it must be proved as laid in the indictment, and the variance between the allegation and the proof is fatal. See, in this connection, Rogers v. State, 29 Ga. App. 363, 365 (115 S. E. 668), and cit.; Horton v. State, 21 Ga. App. 120 (3) (93 S. E. 1012); Thompson v. State, 118 Ga. 330 (3) (45 S. E. 410); Perkins v. State, 29 Ga. App. 278 (3), 280 (115 S. E. 27), and cit. It follows that the verdict was contrary to law and that the court erred in refusing the grant of a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Holmes v. State, 147 S.E. 776, 39 Ga. App. 556, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 418 (Ga. Ct. App. 1929).

147 S.E. 776 (Holmes v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thompson v. State
45 S.E. 410 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1903)
Horton v. State
93 S.E. 1012 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Perkins v. State
115 S.E. 27 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1922)
Rogers v. State
115 S.E. 668 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)