Sessions v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Sessions v. State

206 S.E.2d 99, 131 Ga. App. 379, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1429

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 6, 1974

Docket49097

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 206 S.E.2d 99 (Sessions 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

Sessions v. State, 206 S.E.2d 99, 131 Ga. App. 379, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1429 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Bell, Chief Judge.

In this prosecution for selling liquor on Sunday, defendant pleaded not guilty and waived a jury trial. *380 After the trial began, counsel asked for an opportunity to obtain an applicable city ordinance. The transcript then reflects as follows: "The Court: File a motion in the case Mr. Myers [Defendant’s Counsel]: I withdraw my objection (Discussion off the record) (The above-styled case was reset).” Thereafter defendant filed a motion and plea in bar of trial on the ground that the trial court terminated the trial by the removal of the case from the calendar and rescheduling it for hearing of a motion to be filed by the defense. To try the case under these circumstances, the defense argues, would constitute double jeopardy. The denial of the motion was certified for immediate review. Held:

Submitted February 5, 1974 Decided March 6, 1974 Rehearing denied March 25, 1974 Paul C. Myers, for appellant. Hinson McAuliffe, Solicitor, James L. Webb, Ernest J. Hughie, Frank A. Bowers, for appellee.

The record only shows a continuance of the case in order to afford defendant’s counsel an opportunity to comply with the direction of the court to reduce the motion to writing and to obtain the city ordinance counsel deemed pertinent. The record does not show a termination of the case and an attempt to retry the defendant and thereby place her in jeopardy again for the same crime.

Judgment affirmed.

Quillian and Clark, JJ, concur.

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

Bell, Chief Judge.

In this prosecution for selling liquor on Sunday, defendant pleaded not guilty and waived a jury trial. *380 After the trial began, counsel asked for an opportunity to obtain an applicable city ordinance. The transcript then reflects as follows: "The Court: File a motion in the case Mr. Myers [Defendant’s Counsel]: I withdraw my objection (Discussion off the record) (The above-styled case was reset).” Thereafter defendant filed a motion and plea in bar of trial on the ground that the trial court terminated the trial by the removal of the case from the calendar and rescheduling it for hearing of a motion to be filed by the defense. To try the case under these circumstances, the defense argues, would constitute double jeopardy. The denial of the motion was certified for immediate review. Held:

Submitted February 5, 1974 Decided March 6, 1974 Rehearing denied March 25, 1974 Paul C. Myers, for appellant. Hinson McAuliffe, Solicitor, James L. Webb, Ernest J. Hughie, Frank A. Bowers, for appellee.

The record only shows a continuance of the case in order to afford defendant’s counsel an opportunity to comply with the direction of the court to reduce the motion to writing and to obtain the city ordinance counsel deemed pertinent. The record does not show a termination of the case and an attempt to retry the defendant and thereby place her in jeopardy again for the same crime.

Judgment affirmed.

Quillian and Clark, JJ, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

206 S.E.2d 99, 131 Ga. App. 379, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sessions-v-state-gactapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack