Oglesby v. State

49 S.E. 706, 121 Ga. 602, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 21
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 26, 1905
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 49 S.E. 706 (Oglesby v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Oglesby v. State, 49 S.E. 706, 121 Ga. 602, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 21 (Ga. 1905).

Opinion

Cobb, J.

The accused was arraigned in the city court of Elberton, upon a presentment charging him with a violation of a local act prohibiting the sale of liquor in Elbert county. Acts 1884 — 5, p. 520. He filed a general and special demurrer and plea in abatement to the presentment, each of which being overruled, he filed a plea of not guilty. After conviction he made a motion for a new trial, and assigns error upon the overruling of this motion and on the overruling of the demurrers and plea in abatement. The principles stated in the headnotes are controlling upon the various questions involved. While the record does disclose some irregularity in the manner in which the accused was brought into court for trial, this irregularity did not afford any reason for granting a new trial. If the accused, after having [604]*604been brought into court, bad moved for a discharge upon the ground that he was in the custody of his bail, who had not surrendered him, and that the court could not proceed to bring him into court by force until his bond had been forfeited, he might have been entitled to a release. But if the judge committed any error in this respect, it can not be taken advantage of by a motion for a new trial. A ruling of the court in reference to the matter should have been invoked, and exceptions pendente lite filed if the ruling was adverse to the accused. The case of McDaniel v. State, cited in the headnotes, seems to be controlling, in principle, upon this point. We see no reason for reversing the judgment.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Reliford v. State
388 S.E.2d 21 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
Capitol Distributing Co. v. State
63 S.E.2d 451 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1951)
Stephens v. Reid
6 S.E.2d 728 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Donaldson v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
199 S.E. 213 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1938)
McElroy v. Hartsfield
194 S.E. 737 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1937)
Hall v. Simmons
188 S.E. 597 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1936)
Pope v. State
157 S.E. 211 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1931)
Green v. City of Atlanta
135 S.E. 84 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1926)
Roberts v. State
123 S.E. 151 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)
Hewitt v. State
109 S.E. 679 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1921)
Huggins v. State
103 S.E. 32 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1920)
Parks v. State
94 S.E. 628 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Higgs v. State
89 S.E. 361 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1916)
People v. Mueller
143 P. 748 (California Supreme Court, 1914)
Jay v. O'Donnell
98 N.E. 349 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1912)
Saum v. Dewey
115 P. 570 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1911)
Geisse v. State
13 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 385 (Columbiana Circuit Court, 1910)
Geisse v. State
22 Ohio C.C. Dec. 560 (Ohio Circuit Courts, 1910)
Lyles v. State
60 S.E. 578 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1908)
Anderson v. State
58 S.E. 401 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 S.E. 706, 121 Ga. 602, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oglesby-v-state-ga-1905.