Nowicki v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Nowicki v. State

251 S.E.2d 840, 148 Ga. App. 255, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 3146

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 7, 1978

Docket56773

StatusPublished

This text of 251 S.E.2d 840 (Nowicki 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

Nowicki v. State, 251 S.E.2d 840, 148 Ga. App. 255, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 3146 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Birdsong, Judge.

Nowicki appeals his conviction of motor vehicle theft, a violation of Code Ann. § 26-1813. Appellant’s sole contention is that the definitional section of Code Ann. § 26-1812, defining "motor vehicle,” refers to a [256]*256now-repealed legislative enactment (Ga. L. 1953, Nov.-Dec. Sess., p. 566), and is therefore lacking a constitutionally sufficient description of "motor vehicle.” This contention has been decided adversely to appellant by the decision of this court in Dismuke v. State, 142 Ga. App. 381 (3) (236 SE2d 12). Appellant’s sole, enumeration of error is without merit.

Argued October 12, 1978— Decided November 7, 1978 Rehearing denied November 28, 1978 Byrd & Anthony, Lovick P. Anthony, Jr., for appellant. D. E. Turk, District Attorney, Gary C. Christy, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., and Shulman, J., concur.

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

Birdsong, Judge.

Nowicki appeals his conviction of motor vehicle theft, a violation of Code Ann. § 26-1813. Appellant’s sole contention is that the definitional section of Code Ann. § 26-1812, defining "motor vehicle,” refers to a [256]*256now-repealed legislative enactment (Ga. L. 1953, Nov.-Dec. Sess., p. 566), and is therefore lacking a constitutionally sufficient description of "motor vehicle.” This contention has been decided adversely to appellant by the decision of this court in Dismuke v. State, 142 Ga. App. 381 (3) (236 SE2d 12). Appellant’s sole, enumeration of error is without merit.

Argued October 12, 1978— Decided November 7, 1978 Rehearing denied November 28, 1978 Byrd & Anthony, Lovick P. Anthony, Jr., for appellant. D. E. Turk, District Attorney, Gary C. Christy, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., and Shulman, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 S.E.2d 840, 148 Ga. App. 255, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 3146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nowicki-v-state-gactapp-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack