Simpson v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Simpson v. State

130 S.E. 215, 34 Ga. App. 487, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 334

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 10, 1925

Docket16638

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 130 S.E. 215 (Simpson 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

Simpson v. State, 130 S.E. 215, 34 Ga. App. 487, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 334 (Ga. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

The indictment contained two counts, the first charging the accused with manufacturing whisky, and the- second with possessing apparatus used for the distilling of intoxicating liquors. The jury returned the following verdict: “We, the jury, find the defendant guilty of the first account

Homer Hicks, Foreman

and fix his penalty from 2 years.to 4 years.” The court thereupon entered up judgment and sentence requiring the defendant to serve from two to four years in the penitentiary. During the same term of court the defendant made a motion in arrest of judgment, upon the ground that the verdict did not fix the penalty, as the writing fixing the penalty was written below and after the signature of the foreman of the jury, and, therefore, could not legally be considered as part of the verdict. This motion was overruled. Held: No error. See, in this connection, Browning v. State, 31 Ga. App. 150 (6) (120 S. E. 649).

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

The indictment contained two counts, the first charging the accused with manufacturing whisky, and the- second with possessing apparatus used for the distilling of intoxicating liquors. The jury returned the following verdict: “We, the jury, find the defendant guilty of the first account

Homer Hicks, Foreman

and fix his penalty from 2 years.to 4 years.” The court thereupon entered up judgment and sentence requiring the defendant to serve from two to four years in the penitentiary. During the same term of court the defendant made a motion in arrest of judgment, upon the ground that the verdict did not fix the penalty, as the writing fixing the penalty was written below and after the signature of the foreman of the jury, and, therefore, could not legally be considered as part of the verdict. This motion was overruled. Held: No error. See, in this connection, Browning v. State, 31 Ga. App. 150 (6) (120 S. E. 649).

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

130 S.E. 215, 34 Ga. App. 487, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 334, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simpson-v-state-gactapp-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack