Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Miller v. State

Miller v. State

72 S.E. 279, 9 Ga. App. 827, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 354
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided October 10, 1911·No. 3584·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

Powell, J.

1. In a prosecution for adultery, the fact that the alleged participants were, respectively, a married man and a married woman may be shown, either directly or circumstantially. The fact of the marriage may be at least prima facie shown by any of the following methods: by proof of general repute in family (Civil Code (1910), § 5764) ; by proof of general reputation in tht; community (Drawdy v. Hesters, 130 Ga. 161 (1), 60 S. E. 451, 15 L. R. A. (N. S.) 190; Clark v. Cassidy, 62 Ga. 407; Wood v. State, 62 Ga. 406) ; by proof of the fact that the man or the woman, as the case may be, lives together with a person of the opposite sex as his or her spouse, with general recognition in the community of their being married to each other. Clark v. Cassidy, supra.

2. The evidence fully supported the verdict. Judgment affirmed.

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

Miller v. State, 72 S.E. 279, 9 Ga. App. 827, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 354 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).

72 S.E. 279 (Miller v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mauldin v. Green
184 S.E.2d 498 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1971)
Battle v. State
70 S.E.2d 551 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1952)
Freeman v. State
7 S.E.2d 779 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1940)
Lefkoff v. Sicro
6 S.E.2d 687 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
State v. Sayko
216 P. 1036 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1923)
State v. Poulos
212 P. 120 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1922)
Plummer v. State
108 S.E. 128 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1921)
Nash v. State
94 S.E. 60 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Brewton v. State
72 S.E. 280 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1911)