Martin v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Martin v. State

35 S.E.2d 151, 199 Ga. 731, 1945 Ga. LEXIS 358

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided September 7, 1945·No. 15255.·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Atkinson, Justice.

1. A question of constitutional law not raised at the trial, but presented first in a petition to the superior court for a certiorari, is not properly presented for decision on a writ of error. Bolton v. Newnan, 147 Ga. 400 (94 S. E. 236); Edwards v. McNair, 152 Ga. 486 (110 S. E. 280); Mays v. State, 175 Ga. 260 (165 S. E. 68); Lunsford v. State, 187 Ga. 162 (199 S. E. 808).

2. Where, upon the trial of a misdemeanor case in the criminal court of Eulton County, the accused demanded a full panel of jurors, to which the trial judge asked, “What do you mean ‘full panel’ and counsel replied, “We ask that the full panel be put upon the accused in accordance with' the law, and waive no rights,” ’ and where the court directed the clerk to call the first twelve jurors in the box, and thereupon the accused was arraigned, and counsel for the accused and for the State proceeded to strike from the list of twelve jurors until only five remained, who were sworn, such procedure does not raise before the trial court the question of the constitutionality of the act of 1891 (Ga. L. 1891, p. 935), creating said.court and providing that a jury .shall consist of five to be stricken alternately from a panel of twelve.

3. Other assignments of error in the petition for certiorari and in the writ of error, not being questions over which this court has jurisdiction, the case is transferred to the Court of Appeals.

Transferred to the Gourt of Appeals.

All the Justices concm-, except Head, J., disqualified.

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

Atkinson, Justice.

1. A question of constitutional law not raised at the trial, but presented first in a petition to the superior court for a certiorari, is not properly presented for decision on a writ of error. Bolton v. Newnan, 147 Ga. 400 (94 S. E. 236); Edwards v. McNair, 152 Ga. 486 (110 S. E. 280); Mays v. State, 175 Ga. 260 (165 S. E. 68); Lunsford v. State, 187 Ga. 162 (199 S. E. 808).

2. Where, upon the trial of a misdemeanor case in the criminal court of Eulton County, the accused demanded a full panel of jurors, to which the trial judge asked, “What do you mean ‘full panel’ and counsel replied, “We ask that the full panel be put upon the accused in accordance with' the law, and waive no rights,” ’ and where the court directed the clerk to call the first twelve jurors in the box, and thereupon the accused was arraigned, and counsel for the accused and for the State proceeded to strike from the list of twelve jurors until only five remained, who were sworn, such procedure does not raise before the trial court the question of the constitutionality of the act of 1891 (Ga. L. 1891, p. 935), creating said.court and providing that a jury .shall consist of five to be stricken alternately from a panel of twelve.

3. Other assignments of error in the petition for certiorari and in the writ of error, not being questions over which this court has jurisdiction, the case is transferred to the Court of Appeals.

Transferred to the Gourt of Appeals.

All the Justices concm-, except Head, J., disqualified.

Martin v. State, 35 S.E.2d 151, 199 Ga. 731, 1945 Ga. LEXIS 358 (Ga. 1945).

Pincite

35 S.E.2d 151 (Martin v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related