Reese v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Reese v. State

129 S.E. 886, 34 Ga. App. 453, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 308

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 6, 1925

Docket16600

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 129 S.E. 886 (Reese 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

Reese v. State, 129 S.E. 886, 34 Ga. App. 453, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 308 (Ga. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

The accused being on trial for manufacturing intoxicating liquors, and the evidence tending to show that he and others were found by county policemen at a whisky still in a swamp, with fire under the still and beer from which whisky might be distilled in it, and withythe accused stirring the beer in the still and other members of his party doing other acts essential to the operation of the still, but further showing that, before any whisky was actually distilled or the worm or condenser had been attached to the body of the still, the ofiicers rushed upon and arrested some members of the distilling party and the others escaped arrest by flight, the verdict finding the accused guilty of an attempt to manufacture whisky was not without evidence to support it. See Groves v. State, 116 Ga. 516 (42 S. E. 755, 59 L. R. A. 598), and citations in opinion.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and, Bloodworth, J., concwr.

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

Luke, J.

The accused being on trial for manufacturing intoxicating liquors, and the evidence tending to show that he and others were found by county policemen at a whisky still in a swamp, with fire under the still and beer from which whisky might be distilled in it, and withythe accused stirring the beer in the still and other members of his party doing other acts essential to the operation of the still, but further showing that, before any whisky was actually distilled or the worm or condenser had been attached to the body of the still, the ofiicers rushed upon and arrested some members of the distilling party and the others escaped arrest by flight, the verdict finding the accused guilty of an attempt to manufacture whisky was not without evidence to support it. See Groves v. State, 116 Ga. 516 (42 S. E. 755, 59 L. R. A. 598), and citations in opinion.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and, Bloodworth, J., concwr.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

129 S.E. 886, 34 Ga. App. 453, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 308, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reese-v-state-gactapp-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack