Revier v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Revier v. State

98 S.E. 603, 149 Ga. 20

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMarch 13, 1919

DocketNo. 1242

StatusPublished

This text of 98 S.E. 603 (Revier 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

Revier v. State, 98 S.E. 603, 149 Ga. 20 (Ga. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

Fish, C. J.

1. There was nothing in the evidence for the State or the accused, nor in the statement made by him to the jury, which authorized an instruction as to the law of involuntary manslaughter. In his statement to the jury the accused denied that he shot .the person killed, and the evidence submitted in his behalf tended to support his statement. The evidence for the State, considered most favorably for the accused, made out such a case as fell within the rulings made in Smith v. State, 124 Ga. 213 (52 S. E. 329), and Hamilton v. State, 129 Ga. 747 (59 S. E. 803), where the facts were quite similar to those here shown by the evidence for' the State, and was governed by the proviso in the Penal Code (1910), § 67, “that where such involuntary killing shall happen in the commission of an unlawful act which, in its consequences, naturally tends to destroy the life of a human being, or is committed in the prosecution of a riotous intent, or of a crime punishable by death or confinement in the penitentiary, the offense shall be deemed and adjudged to be murder.”

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the court did not err in refusing a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Fish, C. J.

1. There was nothing in the evidence for the State or the accused, nor in the statement made by him to the jury, which authorized an instruction as to the law of involuntary manslaughter. In his statement to the jury the accused denied that he shot .the person killed, and the evidence submitted in his behalf tended to support his statement. The evidence for the State, considered most favorably for the accused, made out such a case as fell within the rulings made in Smith v. State, 124 Ga. 213 (52 S. E. 329), and Hamilton v. State, 129 Ga. 747 (59 S. E. 803), where the facts were quite similar to those here shown by the evidence for' the State, and was governed by the proviso in the Penal Code (1910), § 67, “that where such involuntary killing shall happen in the commission of an unlawful act which, in its consequences, naturally tends to destroy the life of a human being, or is committed in the prosecution of a riotous intent, or of a crime punishable by death or confinement in the penitentiary, the offense shall be deemed and adjudged to be murder.”

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the court did not err in refusing a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

98 S.E. 603, 149 Ga. 20, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/revier-v-state-ga-1919.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack