Mercer v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Mercer v. State

23 S.E.2d 869, 68 Ga. App. 735, 1943 Ga. App. LEXIS 328

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 11, 1943

Docket29897.

StatusPublished

This text of 23 S.E.2d 869 (Mercer 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

Mercer v. State, 23 S.E.2d 869, 68 Ga. App. 735, 1943 Ga. App. LEXIS 328 (Ga. Ct. App. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

The defendant was convicted of the offense of making whisky. The undisputed evidence showed that the defendant (a white man) and four negroes were at a distillery when whisky was being made; that the defendant grabbed up a sack containing a gallon jug of whisky and ran off, but was caught by the arresting officer after running about a quarter of a mile. The evidence further authorized the jury to find that the defendant and the negroes were all working at the still and helping in the manufacture of the whisky, and that the still was located on land that the defendant rented and controlled. The jury evidently rejected the defendant’s statement to them that he had nothing-to do with the making of the whisky, but merely went there to get some whisky to drink. The evidence authorized the verdict; and the overruling of the motion for new trial, containing only the general grounds, was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Gardner, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

The defendant was convicted of the offense of making whisky. The undisputed evidence showed that the defendant (a white man) and four negroes were at a distillery when whisky was being made; that the defendant grabbed up a sack containing a gallon jug of whisky and ran off, but was caught by the arresting officer after running about a quarter of a mile. The evidence further authorized the jury to find that the defendant and the negroes were all working at the still and helping in the manufacture of the whisky, and that the still was located on land that the defendant rented and controlled. The jury evidently rejected the defendant’s statement to them that he had nothing-to do with the making of the whisky, but merely went there to get some whisky to drink. The evidence authorized the verdict; and the overruling of the motion for new trial, containing only the general grounds, was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Gardner, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 S.E.2d 869, 68 Ga. App. 735, 1943 Ga. App. LEXIS 328, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mercer-v-state-gactapp-1943.