Murcherson v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Murcherson v. State

145 S.E.2d 58, 112 Ga. App. 299, 1965 Ga. App. LEXIS 676

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 8, 1965

Docket41394

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 145 S.E.2d 58 (Murcherson 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

Murcherson v. State, 145 S.E.2d 58, 112 Ga. App. 299, 1965 Ga. App. LEXIS 676 (Ga. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinions

Pannell, Judge.

Various rulings and actions of the trial judge are recited in the bill of exceptions, including the overruling of a motion by the defendant for acquittal at the close of the State’s evidence, and the overruling of defendant’s motion for new trial after' verdict against him. None of these rulings are alleged to be error or complaint made thereof. The bill of exceptions does recite that it is presented “so that the errors herein alleged to have been committed may be considered and corrected,” and “comes plaintiff in error and, assigning error on the judgment and rulings herein complained of as being contrary to law and to the evidence” and prays that the bill of exceptions be certified, etc., “in order that the alleged error may be considered and corrected,” but nowhere therein is any ruling “complained of” or designated or “alleged” as erroneous upon which this court may determine error is assigned. Under these circumstances, the bill of exceptions, failing to contain a proper assignment of error, must be dismissed. Armstrong v. State, 106 Ga. App. 763 (128 SE2d 350).

Writ of error dismissed.

Nichols, P. J., and- Eberhardt, J., concur.

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

Pannell, Judge.

Various rulings and actions of the trial judge are recited in the bill of exceptions, including the overruling of a motion by the defendant for acquittal at the close of the State’s evidence, and the overruling of defendant’s motion for new trial after' verdict against him. None of these rulings are alleged to be error or complaint made thereof. The bill of exceptions does recite that it is presented “so that the errors herein alleged to have been committed may be considered and corrected,” and “comes plaintiff in error and, assigning error on the judgment and rulings herein complained of as being contrary to law and to the evidence” and prays that the bill of exceptions be certified, etc., “in order that the alleged error may be considered and corrected,” but nowhere therein is any ruling “complained of” or designated or “alleged” as erroneous upon which this court may determine error is assigned. Under these circumstances, the bill of exceptions, failing to contain a proper assignment of error, must be dismissed. Armstrong v. State, 106 Ga. App. 763 (128 SE2d 350).

Writ of error dismissed.

Nichols, P. J., and- Eberhardt, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

145 S.E.2d 58, 112 Ga. App. 299, 1965 Ga. App. LEXIS 676, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murcherson-v-state-gactapp-1965.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack