Marshall v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Marshall v. State

132 S.E. 236, 35 Ga. App. 191, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 619

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 2, 1926

Docket17039

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 132 S.E. 236 (Marshall 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

Marshall v. State, 132 S.E. 236, 35 Ga. App. 191, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 619 (Ga. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

Mamie Marshall was convicted of possessing Whisky. The only special ground of the motion for a new trial is that the court failed to charge the jury that everything in the residence of a married woman is presumed to be in the possession of her husband. The evidence shows that an automobile drove up in front of the residence of the defendant, and some one in the car blew the horn; that Mamie Marshall went out to the car and got a jug or bottle and carried it into the house; that later an officer saw, through a window of the house, a gallon jug of intoxicating liquor [192]*192on the table in the kitchen and told the defendant to hand it to him through the window, which she did; that this officer and another then went into the house and found two other gallon jugs or bottles containing whisky, and that no one else was in the room with defendant then; that her husband was not at home at that time, but was at some point in Florida. The defendant put up no witness, and none of this evidence was denied by her in her statement, nor did she deny that the whisky belonged to her. There was no request to charge that the contents of the house were presumed to be in the possession of the husband; and,'under the facts of this case, there was no error in failing to do so.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworlh, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

Mamie Marshall was convicted of possessing Whisky. The only special ground of the motion for a new trial is that the court failed to charge the jury that everything in the residence of a married woman is presumed to be in the possession of her husband. The evidence shows that an automobile drove up in front of the residence of the defendant, and some one in the car blew the horn; that Mamie Marshall went out to the car and got a jug or bottle and carried it into the house; that later an officer saw, through a window of the house, a gallon jug of intoxicating liquor [192]*192on the table in the kitchen and told the defendant to hand it to him through the window, which she did; that this officer and another then went into the house and found two other gallon jugs or bottles containing whisky, and that no one else was in the room with defendant then; that her husband was not at home at that time, but was at some point in Florida. The defendant put up no witness, and none of this evidence was denied by her in her statement, nor did she deny that the whisky belonged to her. There was no request to charge that the contents of the house were presumed to be in the possession of the husband; and,'under the facts of this case, there was no error in failing to do so.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworlh, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 S.E. 236, 35 Ga. App. 191, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 619, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marshall-v-state-gactapp-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack