Hunter v. State
This text of 55 S.E. 1044 (Hunter v. State) 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.
Opinion
To constitute the offense of riot there must be a common intent to commit the act constituting the alleged riotous conduct. Accordingly, it was error requiring the grant of a new trial for the court, upon the trial of two persons charged with this offense, to instruct the jury that if the defendants “united, with or without a common intent, in doing an unlawful act of violence, the acts and words of each one while the thing [was] in progress [became] the acts and words of the other one engaged therein.” Dixon v. State, 105 Ga. 787, and cit.; Tripp v. State, 109 Ga. 489; Coney v. State, 113 Ga. 1060.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
55 S.E. 1044, 127 Ga. 43, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 720, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunter-v-state-ga-1906.