Langston v. City of Hazlehurst

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Langston v. City of Hazlehurst

71 S.E. 592, 9 Ga. App. 449, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 602

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 7, 1911

Docket3400

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 71 S.E. 592 (Langston v. City of Hazlehurst) 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

Langston v. City of Hazlehurst, 71 S.E. 592, 9 Ga. App. 449, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 602 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

1. The judge of the superior court did not err in refusing to sanction the petition for certiorari.

2. A mayor is not disqualified to try one accused of a violation of a city ordinance, notwithstanding that in the event of a conviction a portion of the fine imposed is to be paid to him as costs. Pace v. Hazlehurst, ante, 203 (70 S. E. 967) ; Wellmaker v. Terrell, 3 Ga. App. 792 (60 S. E. 464).

3. On the trial of one charged with the violation of a city ordinance in • having on hand intoxicating liquor for the purpose of illegal sale, evidence that he received money from another person, accompanied with the request to secure whisky for the latter, and that shortly thereafter the accused delivered a bottle of whisky to that person, would cast upon him the burden of showing where, how, and from whom he got the whisky; and this burden is not successfully carried simply by the statement of the accused that he had no interest in the whisky, but had secured it from another person. Bray v. Commerce, 5 Ga. App. 605 (63 S. E. 596); Shaw v. State, 3 Ga. App. 607 (60 S. E. 326). Judgment affirmed.

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

Hill, C. J.

1. The judge of the superior court did not err in refusing to sanction the petition for certiorari.

2. A mayor is not disqualified to try one accused of a violation of a city ordinance, notwithstanding that in the event of a conviction a portion of the fine imposed is to be paid to him as costs. Pace v. Hazlehurst, ante, 203 (70 S. E. 967) ; Wellmaker v. Terrell, 3 Ga. App. 792 (60 S. E. 464).

3. On the trial of one charged with the violation of a city ordinance in • having on hand intoxicating liquor for the purpose of illegal sale, evidence that he received money from another person, accompanied with the request to secure whisky for the latter, and that shortly thereafter the accused delivered a bottle of whisky to that person, would cast upon him the burden of showing where, how, and from whom he got the whisky; and this burden is not successfully carried simply by the statement of the accused that he had no interest in the whisky, but had secured it from another person. Bray v. Commerce, 5 Ga. App. 605 (63 S. E. 596); Shaw v. State, 3 Ga. App. 607 (60 S. E. 326). Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

71 S.E. 592, 9 Ga. App. 449, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 602, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/langston-v-city-of-hazlehurst-gactapp-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack