King v. State

43 S.E. 426, 117 Ga. 39, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 142
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided February 7, 1903·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

‘Candler, J.

1. Failure to sufficiently describe, in an accusation of larceny, the property alleged to have been stolen, is a defect which should be taken advantage of by demurrer in writing before pleading to the merits. This court will not reverse the judgment o£ the trial court overruling a motion to quash an accusation on the ground of such insufficient description, when it does not appear that any written demurrer to the accusation was ever filed.

2. The evidence was sufficient to warrant the verdict of conviction, and it does not appear that the trial court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

By five Justices.

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

King v. State, 43 S.E. 426, 117 Ga. 39, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 142 (Ga. 1903).

43 S.E. 426 (King v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Plapinger v. State
120 S.E.2d 609 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1961)
Gilmore v. State
45 S.E. 226 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1903)