McNeely v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

McNeely v. State

103 S.E. 189, 25 Ga. App. 328, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 784

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 12, 1920

Docket11325

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 103 S.E. 189 (McNeely 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

McNeely v. State, 103 S.E. 189, 25 Ga. App. 328, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 784 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. The fact that a grand jury has made a return of “no bill” or failed to find a bill of indictment against a person does not prevent the resubmission and finding of another bill for the same offense by the same or another grand jury. See 22 Cyc. 207 (6). Accordingly, in the instant case, the court did not err in overruling, the special plea in bar and the motion to quash, which set up that the same grand jury that returned this bill of indictment against the defendant had previously, at the same term and upon the same facts and the testimony of the same witnesses, made a return of “ no bill ” upon the same charge against him.

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Conviction of stabbing; from Jefferson'superior court—Judge Hardeman. January 10, 1920.

J. R. Phillips, A. R. Wright, for plaintiff in error. Walter F. Grey, solicitor-general, contra.

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

Luke, J.

1. The fact that a grand jury has made a return of “no bill” or failed to find a bill of indictment against a person does not prevent the resubmission and finding of another bill for the same offense by the same or another grand jury. See 22 Cyc. 207 (6). Accordingly, in the instant case, the court did not err in overruling, the special plea in bar and the motion to quash, which set up that the same grand jury that returned this bill of indictment against the defendant had previously, at the same term and upon the same facts and the testimony of the same witnesses, made a return of “ no bill ” upon the same charge against him.

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Conviction of stabbing; from Jefferson'superior court—Judge Hardeman. January 10, 1920.

J. R. Phillips, A. R. Wright, for plaintiff in error. Walter F. Grey, solicitor-general, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 S.E. 189, 25 Ga. App. 328, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 784, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcneely-v-state-gactapp-1920.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack