Sheerer v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Sheerer v. State

17 Ga. App. 335

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 29, 1915

Docket6844

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 17 Ga. App. 335 (Sheerer 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

Sheerer v. State, 17 Ga. App. 335 (Ga. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, J.

1. On the trial of one indicted for using obscene, vulgar, and profane language in the presence of females, it is not necessary that the exact words charged in the indictment be proved. “If some of the words be proved as laid, and the words so proved amount to an indictable offense, it will be sufficient.” Wharton’s Criminal Pleading and Practice, § 203; Dyer v. State, 99 Ga. 20 (3), 22 (25 S. E. 609, 59 Am. St. R. 228); Smith v. State, 100 Ga. 319 (26 S. E. 769).

2. On the trial of one for using obscene and vulgar or profane language in the presence of females, it is for the jury to determine whether there was sufficient provocation to excuse their use. Dyer v. State, supra; Headers v. State, 96 Ga. 299 (22 S. E. 527); Williams v. State, 105 Ga. 608 (31 S. E. 738); Fish v. State, 124 Ga. 416 (52 S. E. 737); Thompson v. Shelverton, 131 Ga. 714 (63 S. E. 220); Beckworth v. Phillips, 6 Ga. App. 859 (65 S. E. 1075). The trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial. ’ Judgment affirmed.

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

Broyles, J.

1. On the trial of one indicted for using obscene, vulgar, and profane language in the presence of females, it is not necessary that the exact words charged in the indictment be proved. “If some of the words be proved as laid, and the words so proved amount to an indictable offense, it will be sufficient.” Wharton’s Criminal Pleading and Practice, § 203; Dyer v. State, 99 Ga. 20 (3), 22 (25 S. E. 609, 59 Am. St. R. 228); Smith v. State, 100 Ga. 319 (26 S. E. 769).

2. On the trial of one for using obscene and vulgar or profane language in the presence of females, it is for the jury to determine whether there was sufficient provocation to excuse their use. Dyer v. State, supra; Headers v. State, 96 Ga. 299 (22 S. E. 527); Williams v. State, 105 Ga. 608 (31 S. E. 738); Fish v. State, 124 Ga. 416 (52 S. E. 737); Thompson v. Shelverton, 131 Ga. 714 (63 S. E. 220); Beckworth v. Phillips, 6 Ga. App. 859 (65 S. E. 1075). The trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial. ’ Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 Ga. App. 335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sheerer-v-state-gactapp-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack