Robinson v. Brown

Supreme Court of Georgia

Robinson v. Brown

91 S.E. 31, 146 Ga. 257, 1916 Ga. LEXIS 697

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedDecember 13, 1916

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 91 S.E. 31 (Robinson v. Brown) 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

Robinson v. Brown, 91 S.E. 31, 146 Ga. 257, 1916 Ga. LEXIS 697 (Ga. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Beck, J.

1. Where a criminal recognizance was forfeited at one term, and a scire facias was issued and made returnable to a later term and was duly served before that term, and when at the term to which it was returnable the case against the principal was called, and upon his failure to appear forfeiture absolute was taken, such forfeiture was not premature.

2. The fact that the ease was not entered upon any calendar, and that upon the appearance day of the term (which, in the civil division of the court, was subsequent to the day upon which the forfeiture was had) the ease was not marked in default, does not affect the ruling just stated. Procedure in the matter of. forfeiting criminal recognizances is controlled by the law contained in sections 960, 961, and 962 of the Penal Code; and the law which controls procedure in other civil suits, contained in sections 5653, 5654, and 5655 of the Civil Code, is not applicable to the forfeiture of a criminal bond.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Beck, J.

1. Where a criminal recognizance was forfeited at one term, and a scire facias was issued and made returnable to a later term and was duly served before that term, and when at the term to which it was returnable the case against the principal was called, and upon his failure to appear forfeiture absolute was taken, such forfeiture was not premature.

2. The fact that the ease was not entered upon any calendar, and that upon the appearance day of the term (which, in the civil division of the court, was subsequent to the day upon which the forfeiture was had) the ease was not marked in default, does not affect the ruling just stated. Procedure in the matter of. forfeiting criminal recognizances is controlled by the law contained in sections 960, 961, and 962 of the Penal Code; and the law which controls procedure in other civil suits, contained in sections 5653, 5654, and 5655 of the Civil Code, is not applicable to the forfeiture of a criminal bond.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 S.E. 31, 146 Ga. 257, 1916 Ga. LEXIS 697, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-brown-ga-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack