Shepherd v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Shepherd v. State

137 S.E. 639, 36 Ga. App. 583, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 162

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 8, 1927

Docket17796

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 137 S.E. 639 (Shepherd 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

Shepherd v. State, 137 S.E. 639, 36 Ga. App. 583, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 162 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

In his statement on the trial the accused admitted that when he was arrested he was in possession of two pints of whisky; and there is no merit in the special ground of the motion for a new trial, especially when this ground is considered in connection with the note of the trial judge attached thereto. “There is no merit in those grounds of the motion for a new trial which complain of the admission of cer-' tain testimony of witnesses for the State as to finding a flask of whisky in the defendant’s pocket when searching his person while he was under arrest. Even had the arrest been illegal and tlie search unauthorized, as contended, the evidence would have been admissible. Smith v. State, 144 Ga. 679 (87 S. E. 893); Smith v. State, 17 Ga. App. 693 (88 S. E. 42.).” Stoker v. State, 23 Ga. App. 11 (97 S. E. 273).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Bloodworth, J.

In his statement on the trial the accused admitted that when he was arrested he was in possession of two pints of whisky; and there is no merit in the special ground of the motion for a new trial, especially when this ground is considered in connection with the note of the trial judge attached thereto. “There is no merit in those grounds of the motion for a new trial which complain of the admission of cer-' tain testimony of witnesses for the State as to finding a flask of whisky in the defendant’s pocket when searching his person while he was under arrest. Even had the arrest been illegal and tlie search unauthorized, as contended, the evidence would have been admissible. Smith v. State, 144 Ga. 679 (87 S. E. 893); Smith v. State, 17 Ga. App. 693 (88 S. E. 42.).” Stoker v. State, 23 Ga. App. 11 (97 S. E. 273).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 S.E. 639, 36 Ga. App. 583, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 162, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shepherd-v-state-gactapp-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack