Marks v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Marks v. State

68 S.E. 951, 8 Ga. App. 283, 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 131

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 20, 1910

Docket2737

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 68 S.E. 951 (Marks 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

Marks v. State, 68 S.E. 951, 8 Ga. App. 283, 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 131 (Ga. Ct. App. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

Russell, J.

1. The right of certiorari is a constitutional right, and may be used to review any judgment of an inferior judicatory. It may be exercised without moving for a new trial in the court in which the case was tried, or it may be used as a means of reviewing the judgment upon a motion for a new trial; and the right is unaffected by anything that may have transpired in the lower court, if the remedy is pursued in clue time.

2. The statements of a petition for certiorari, properly verified when the petition is presented for sanction, are to be presumed true until the coming- in of the answer. As the evidence upon the trial, as appears from the brief of the evidence approved by the judge of the city court and incorporated in the petition for certiorari, did' not authorize the conviction of the defendant, his certiorari should have been sanctioned.

Judgment reversed.

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

Russell, J.

1. The right of certiorari is a constitutional right, and may be used to review any judgment of an inferior judicatory. It may be exercised without moving for a new trial in the court in which the case was tried, or it may be used as a means of reviewing the judgment upon a motion for a new trial; and the right is unaffected by anything that may have transpired in the lower court, if the remedy is pursued in clue time.

2. The statements of a petition for certiorari, properly verified when the petition is presented for sanction, are to be presumed true until the coming- in of the answer. As the evidence upon the trial, as appears from the brief of the evidence approved by the judge of the city court and incorporated in the petition for certiorari, did' not authorize the conviction of the defendant, his certiorari should have been sanctioned.

Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

68 S.E. 951, 8 Ga. App. 283, 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marks-v-state-gactapp-1910.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack