Smallwood v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Smallwood v. State

70 S.E. 1124, 9 Ga. App. 300, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 522

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 24, 1911

Docket3299

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 70 S.E. 1124 (Smallwood 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

Smallwood v. State, 70 S.E. 1124, 9 Ga. App. 300, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 522 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Powell, J.

1. Upon an indictment charging assault with intent to murder, a verdict of simple assault may be rendered.

2. The fact that the person, in committing the' assault, was also guilty of riot, or was also guilty of violating the act of 1910 (Daws 1910, p. 137), making it unlawful to shoot at a dwelling-house, does not render the conviction illegal. It being reasonably inferable from the evidence that the person who shot at the house did so with knowledge that- the prosecutor was therein, and shot toward him with the intention of either injuring him or frightening him, this is sufficient to characterize the act as an assault. Edwards v. State, 4 Ga. App. 849 (62 S. E. 565).

3. The evidence as to the defendant being the perpetrator of the crime, though somewhat weak and inconclusive, is nevertheless not inadequate from a legal standpoint to support the verdict.

4. Since the indictment was for assault with intent to murder, evidence tending to show prior quarrels between the parties and prior acts of violence on the part of the accused toward the prosecutor was admissible for the purpose of showing motive and malice. Judgment affirmed.

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

Powell, J.

1. Upon an indictment charging assault with intent to murder, a verdict of simple assault may be rendered.

2. The fact that the person, in committing the' assault, was also guilty of riot, or was also guilty of violating the act of 1910 (Daws 1910, p. 137), making it unlawful to shoot at a dwelling-house, does not render the conviction illegal. It being reasonably inferable from the evidence that the person who shot at the house did so with knowledge that- the prosecutor was therein, and shot toward him with the intention of either injuring him or frightening him, this is sufficient to characterize the act as an assault. Edwards v. State, 4 Ga. App. 849 (62 S. E. 565).

3. The evidence as to the defendant being the perpetrator of the crime, though somewhat weak and inconclusive, is nevertheless not inadequate from a legal standpoint to support the verdict.

4. Since the indictment was for assault with intent to murder, evidence tending to show prior quarrels between the parties and prior acts of violence on the part of the accused toward the prosecutor was admissible for the purpose of showing motive and malice. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

70 S.E. 1124, 9 Ga. App. 300, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 522, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smallwood-v-state-gactapp-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack