Raines v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Raines v. State

198 S.E. 126, 58 Ga. App. 176, 1938 Ga. App. LEXIS 216

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 2, 1938

Docket26993

StatusPublished

This text of 198 S.E. 126 (Raines 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

Raines v. State, 198 S.E. 126, 58 Ga. App. 176, 1938 Ga. App. LEXIS 216 (Ga. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

The accused was convicted of the offense of knowingly possessing apparatus for the distilling of intoxicating liquors. It appears from the bill of exceptions' and the transcript of the record that the motion for new trial was overruled on March 21, 1938; and the bill of exceptions states that it was presented to the judge on “the 13th day of April, 1938, and within the time prescribed by law.” The statement that the bill of exceptions was presented “within the time prescribed by law” is contradicted by the preceding statement that it was presented on “the 13th day of April, 1938.” Coker v. Life &c. Ins. Co., 180 Ga. 525 (179 S. E. 626). It not affirmatively appearing that the bill of exceptions was presented within the time required by law (within twenty days from the date of the overruling of the motion for new trial), the writ of error must be

Dismissed.

MacIntyre and Querry, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

The accused was convicted of the offense of knowingly possessing apparatus for the distilling of intoxicating liquors. It appears from the bill of exceptions' and the transcript of the record that the motion for new trial was overruled on March 21, 1938; and the bill of exceptions states that it was presented to the judge on “the 13th day of April, 1938, and within the time prescribed by law.” The statement that the bill of exceptions was presented “within the time prescribed by law” is contradicted by the preceding statement that it was presented on “the 13th day of April, 1938.” Coker v. Life &c. Ins. Co., 180 Ga. 525 (179 S. E. 626). It not affirmatively appearing that the bill of exceptions was presented within the time required by law (within twenty days from the date of the overruling of the motion for new trial), the writ of error must be

Dismissed.

MacIntyre and Querry, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 S.E. 126, 58 Ga. App. 176, 1938 Ga. App. LEXIS 216, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raines-v-state-gactapp-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack