Sapp v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Sapp v. State

101 S.E. 919, 24 Ga. App. 712, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 477

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 28, 1920

Docket11021

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 101 S.E. 919 (Sapp 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

Sapp v. State, 101 S.E. 919, 24 Ga. App. 712, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 477 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

Under the ruling in Griffin v. Sisson, 146 Ga. 661 (92 S. E. 278), a court, to be like the city court of Atlanta or Savannah, must not only be located at a county seat which has been incorporated as a city, but must have jurisdiction to try criminal cases below the grade of felony and civil jurisdiction over a portion or all of those classes of cases the jurisdiction of which is not by the constitution exclusively vested in some other court, with territorial jurisdiction in both civil and criminal cases throughout the limits of the county, or jurisdiction in one class of cases limited to the city, and in the other class coextensive with the limits of the county, with a jury of twelve to try all cases, both civil and criminal, if a trial by jury is demanded. In the instant case it appears that the city criminal court of Alma has no civil jurisdiction whatever; therefore a writ of error from that court will not lie to this court, notwithstanding a contrary provision in the act establishing the city criminal court of Alma.

Writ of error dismissed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodwortb, J., concur.

Accusation of misdemeanor; from criminal court of Alma— Judge Boatright. July 18, 1919.

Hartwell L. Williams, for plaintiff in error. H. J. MacIntyre, solicitor, contra.

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

Luke, J.

Under the ruling in Griffin v. Sisson, 146 Ga. 661 (92 S. E. 278), a court, to be like the city court of Atlanta or Savannah, must not only be located at a county seat which has been incorporated as a city, but must have jurisdiction to try criminal cases below the grade of felony and civil jurisdiction over a portion or all of those classes of cases the jurisdiction of which is not by the constitution exclusively vested in some other court, with territorial jurisdiction in both civil and criminal cases throughout the limits of the county, or jurisdiction in one class of cases limited to the city, and in the other class coextensive with the limits of the county, with a jury of twelve to try all cases, both civil and criminal, if a trial by jury is demanded. In the instant case it appears that the city criminal court of Alma has no civil jurisdiction whatever; therefore a writ of error from that court will not lie to this court, notwithstanding a contrary provision in the act establishing the city criminal court of Alma.

Writ of error dismissed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodwortb, J., concur.

Accusation of misdemeanor; from criminal court of Alma— Judge Boatright. July 18, 1919.

Hartwell L. Williams, for plaintiff in error. H. J. MacIntyre, solicitor, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 S.E. 919, 24 Ga. App. 712, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 477, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sapp-v-state-gactapp-1920.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack