Kinnebrew v. City of Greensboro

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Kinnebrew v. City of Greensboro

83 S.E. 148, 15 Ga. App. 344, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 102

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 20, 1914

Docket5840

StatusPublished

This text of 83 S.E. 148 (Kinnebrew v. City of Greensboro) 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

Kinnebrew v. City of Greensboro, 83 S.E. 148, 15 Ga. App. 344, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 102 (Ga. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Russell, C. J.

Evidence that the defendant sold intoxicating liquor, when

the nature and the duration of his possession of the liquor is not satisfactorily explained, may authorize the inference that the liquor was kept by him for the purpose of sale. In a trial in a municipal court for the violation of an ordinance prohibiting the keeping of intoxicating liqüor on hand for illegal sale, the sufficiency of the explanation is addressed to that court. Upon the evidence in the present record, the judge of the superior court did not. err in overruling the certiorari. Rooney v. Augusta, 117 Ga. 709 (45 S. E. 72) ; Robinson v. Americas, 121 Ga. 182 (48 S. E. 924); Coggins v. Griffin, 5 Ga. App. 1 (62 S. E. 659) ; Sawyer v. Blakely, 2 Ga. App. 159 (58 S. E. 399) ; Reese v. Newnan, 120 Ga. 198 (47 S. E. 560). Judgment affirmed.

Roan, J., absent.

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

Russell, C. J.

Evidence that the defendant sold intoxicating liquor, when

the nature and the duration of his possession of the liquor is not satisfactorily explained, may authorize the inference that the liquor was kept by him for the purpose of sale. In a trial in a municipal court for the violation of an ordinance prohibiting the keeping of intoxicating liqüor on hand for illegal sale, the sufficiency of the explanation is addressed to that court. Upon the evidence in the present record, the judge of the superior court did not. err in overruling the certiorari. Rooney v. Augusta, 117 Ga. 709 (45 S. E. 72) ; Robinson v. Americas, 121 Ga. 182 (48 S. E. 924); Coggins v. Griffin, 5 Ga. App. 1 (62 S. E. 659) ; Sawyer v. Blakely, 2 Ga. App. 159 (58 S. E. 399) ; Reese v. Newnan, 120 Ga. 198 (47 S. E. 560). Judgment affirmed.

Roan, J., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 S.E. 148, 15 Ga. App. 344, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kinnebrew-v-city-of-greensboro-gactapp-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack