Kirkland v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Kirkland v. State

146 S.E. 327, 39 Ga. App. 137, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 222

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 15, 1929

Docket19342

StatusPublished

This text of 146 S.E. 327 (Kirkland 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

Kirkland v. State, 146 S.E. 327, 39 Ga. App. 137, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 222 (Ga. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

L. G. Kirkland was convicted of the offense of cheating and swindling. A material averment in the indictment was that the defendant, “for the purpose of obtaining a credit from J. L. Dickenson and with intent to deceive and defraud said J. L, [138]*138Dickenson, did falsely, fraudulently, and knowingly state and represent orally that he, said L. G. Kirkland, then and there owned fifty cords of wood then cut and ready to be marketed, which said statement and representation was then and there false and then and there by the said L. G. Kirkland known to be false.” Upon the trial no evidence showed that the above-stated representation of the accused was untrue. His conviction, therefore, was unauthorized, and the court erred in refusing to grant a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Lulce and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

L. G. Kirkland was convicted of the offense of cheating and swindling. A material averment in the indictment was that the defendant, “for the purpose of obtaining a credit from J. L. Dickenson and with intent to deceive and defraud said J. L, [138]*138Dickenson, did falsely, fraudulently, and knowingly state and represent orally that he, said L. G. Kirkland, then and there owned fifty cords of wood then cut and ready to be marketed, which said statement and representation was then and there false and then and there by the said L. G. Kirkland known to be false.” Upon the trial no evidence showed that the above-stated representation of the accused was untrue. His conviction, therefore, was unauthorized, and the court erred in refusing to grant a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Lulce and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

146 S.E. 327, 39 Ga. App. 137, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 222, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kirkland-v-state-gactapp-1929.