Key v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Key v. State

63 S.E.2d 356, 207 Ga. 552, 1951 Ga. LEXIS 453

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 12, 1951

DocketNo. 17347

StatusPublished

This text of 63 S.E.2d 356 (Key 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.

Bluebook

Key v. State, 63 S.E.2d 356, 207 Ga. 552, 1951 Ga. LEXIS 453 (Ga. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

Head, Justice.

The plaintiff in error was convicted at the January term, 1950, of Thomas Superior Court on an indictment charging that he illegally transported intoxicating beverages and liquors. His motion for new trial, as amended, was overruled on October 26, 1950. Ground 1 of the amended motion for new trial assigns as error the refusal of the trial judge to permit an examination of prospective jurors under the provisions of an act approved February 25, 1949 (Ga. L. 1948-49, p. 1082), and this ground recites that the judge “ruled that the statute, in so far as it pertained to criminal cases, was unconstitutional, to which said ruling of said court the defendant then and there excepted, here and now excepts, and assigns the same as error.” Held:

1. Jurisdiction of the writ of error is not vested in the Supreme Court “because the appeal, in part, deals with the question of the constitutionality of a statute,” as contended by counsel for the plaintiff in error.

2. Exceptions pendente lite may be filed to any interlocutory order, ruling, or judgment of the trial judge in any criminal case. Code, §§■ 6-701, 6-901; Brown v. State, 116 Ga. 559 (42 S. E. 795). “This court has uniformly held that however erroneous such an interlocutory judgment may be, the party is concluded by it unless he file his interlocutory bill [553]*553of exceptions.” Fannin v. Durdin, 54 Ga. 476; Daniels v. Commissioners of Pilotage, 147 Ga. 295 (93 S. E. 887); Dye v. Alexander, 195 Ga. 676 (2) (25 S. E. 2d, 419).

No. 17347. February 12, 1951. A. J. Whitehurst, for plaintiff in error.

3. Exceptions to the ruling complained of not having been preserved in the manner provided by law, no constitutional question could be presented for determination. The writ of error must be

Transferred to the Court of Appeals.

All the Justices concur.

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

Head, Justice.

The plaintiff in error was convicted at the January term, 1950, of Thomas Superior Court on an indictment charging that he illegally transported intoxicating beverages and liquors. His motion for new trial, as amended, was overruled on October 26, 1950. Ground 1 of the amended motion for new trial assigns as error the refusal of the trial judge to permit an examination of prospective jurors under the provisions of an act approved February 25, 1949 (Ga. L. 1948-49, p. 1082), and this ground recites that the judge “ruled that the statute, in so far as it pertained to criminal cases, was unconstitutional, to which said ruling of said court the defendant then and there excepted, here and now excepts, and assigns the same as error.” Held:

1. Jurisdiction of the writ of error is not vested in the Supreme Court “because the appeal, in part, deals with the question of the constitutionality of a statute,” as contended by counsel for the plaintiff in error.

2. Exceptions pendente lite may be filed to any interlocutory order, ruling, or judgment of the trial judge in any criminal case. Code, §§■ 6-701, 6-901; Brown v. State, 116 Ga. 559 (42 S. E. 795). “This court has uniformly held that however erroneous such an interlocutory judgment may be, the party is concluded by it unless he file his interlocutory bill [553]*553of exceptions.” Fannin v. Durdin, 54 Ga. 476; Daniels v. Commissioners of Pilotage, 147 Ga. 295 (93 S. E. 887); Dye v. Alexander, 195 Ga. 676 (2) (25 S. E. 2d, 419).

No. 17347. February 12, 1951. A. J. Whitehurst, for plaintiff in error.

3. Exceptions to the ruling complained of not having been preserved in the manner provided by law, no constitutional question could be presented for determination. The writ of error must be

Transferred to the Court of Appeals.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 S.E.2d 356, 207 Ga. 552, 1951 Ga. LEXIS 453, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/key-v-state-ga-1951.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack