Robinson v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Robinson v. State

91 S.E.2d 52, 93 Ga. App. 203, 1956 Ga. App. LEXIS 678

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 10, 1956

Docket35981

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 91 S.E.2d 52 (Robinson 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

Robinson v. State, 91 S.E.2d 52, 93 Ga. App. 203, 1956 Ga. App. LEXIS 678 (Ga. Ct. App. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

Carlisle, J.

1. Every defendant in a criminal case has the right to be tried upon an indictment or accusation perfect in form and substance. Youmans v. State, 51 Ga. App. 373 (180 S. E. 495), and citations.

2. An indictment or accusation must allege, or in some manner show, the-venue of the alleged offense so as to show that it was committed within the jurisdiction of the court. Smith v. State, 63 Ga. 168; Sanders v. State, 59 Ga. App. 754, 756 (2 S. E. 2d 137).

3. Where, in an indictment charging the defendants with unlawfully cutting timber “in the county aforesaid,” it appears that the indictment is headed, “State of Georgia, Bartow Superior Court,” and it further appears the grand jurors “sworn, chosen and selected for the county of Barrow" charge the defendants with the crime, the indictment is so ambiguous in its statement of the jurisdiction as not to enable the defendants to properly prepare their defense; and, where it appears that a timely written special demurrer was lodged against the indictment before arraignment of the defendants in which this defect was specifically pointed out, the indictment should have been quashed, as indictments are not amendable. Goldsmith v. State, 2 Ga. App. 283, 284 (58 S. E. 486).

4. As the trial court in the present case erred in overruling the demurrer to the indictment all further proceedings were nugatory.

Judgment reversed.

Gardner, P. J., and Townsend,, J., concur.

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

Carlisle, J.

1. Every defendant in a criminal case has the right to be tried upon an indictment or accusation perfect in form and substance. Youmans v. State, 51 Ga. App. 373 (180 S. E. 495), and citations.

2. An indictment or accusation must allege, or in some manner show, the-venue of the alleged offense so as to show that it was committed within the jurisdiction of the court. Smith v. State, 63 Ga. 168; Sanders v. State, 59 Ga. App. 754, 756 (2 S. E. 2d 137).

3. Where, in an indictment charging the defendants with unlawfully cutting timber “in the county aforesaid,” it appears that the indictment is headed, “State of Georgia, Bartow Superior Court,” and it further appears the grand jurors “sworn, chosen and selected for the county of Barrow" charge the defendants with the crime, the indictment is so ambiguous in its statement of the jurisdiction as not to enable the defendants to properly prepare their defense; and, where it appears that a timely written special demurrer was lodged against the indictment before arraignment of the defendants in which this defect was specifically pointed out, the indictment should have been quashed, as indictments are not amendable. Goldsmith v. State, 2 Ga. App. 283, 284 (58 S. E. 486).

4. As the trial court in the present case erred in overruling the demurrer to the indictment all further proceedings were nugatory.

Judgment reversed.

Gardner, P. J., and Townsend,, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 S.E.2d 52, 93 Ga. App. 203, 1956 Ga. App. LEXIS 678, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-state-gactapp-1956.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack