Jones v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Jones v. State

7 S.E.2d 81, 61 Ga. App. 623, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 196

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 5, 1940

Docket28031.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 7 S.E.2d 81 (Jones 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

Jones v. State, 7 S.E.2d 81, 61 Ga. App. 623, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 196 (Ga. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, O. J.

The defendant was charged with operating a lottery, known as the number game, for the purpose of hazarding money. The undisputed evidence showed that the particular scheme for such hazarding required in its operation several or more persons (some to write the tickets or chances, some, known as “pick-up” men, to pick them up and take them to “headquarters,” and others at “headquarters” to add up and assort the tickets). The evidence, direct and circumstantial, for the State, authorized the judge, trying the ease without the intervention of a jury, to find that the accused participated in said scheme by writing some of the lottery tickets; and the offense charged being a misdemeanor, the court properly adjudged him guilty as a principal. See Guthas v. State, 54 Ga. App. 217 (4) (187 S. E. 847). The judge of the superior court did not err in overruling the certiorari.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, O. J.

The defendant was charged with operating a lottery, known as the number game, for the purpose of hazarding money. The undisputed evidence showed that the particular scheme for such hazarding required in its operation several or more persons (some to write the tickets or chances, some, known as “pick-up” men, to pick them up and take them to “headquarters,” and others at “headquarters” to add up and assort the tickets). The evidence, direct and circumstantial, for the State, authorized the judge, trying the ease without the intervention of a jury, to find that the accused participated in said scheme by writing some of the lottery tickets; and the offense charged being a misdemeanor, the court properly adjudged him guilty as a principal. See Guthas v. State, 54 Ga. App. 217 (4) (187 S. E. 847). The judge of the superior court did not err in overruling the certiorari.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 S.E.2d 81, 61 Ga. App. 623, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-state-gactapp-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack