Stewart v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Stewart v. State

79 S.E. 225, 13 Ga. App. 452, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 196

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 17, 1913

Docket5007

StatusPublished

This text of 79 S.E. 225 (Stewart 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

Stewart v. State, 79 S.E. 225, 13 Ga. App. 452, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 196 (Ga. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Bussell, J.

The defendant was convicted of the statutory offense of receiving stolen goods, knowing them to have been stolen. The strongest evidence connecting him with the alleged offense was his statement to the sheriff. Since there is nothing in this testimony which authorizes the conclusion that the defendant knew that there had been a burglary, or knew that the hams in question had been, stolen, the verdict of guilty was not authorized. Judgment reversed.

G. G. Hall, for plaintiff in error. J. H. Price, solicitor, contra.

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

Bussell, J.

The defendant was convicted of the statutory offense of receiving stolen goods, knowing them to have been stolen. The strongest evidence connecting him with the alleged offense was his statement to the sheriff. Since there is nothing in this testimony which authorizes the conclusion that the defendant knew that there had been a burglary, or knew that the hams in question had been, stolen, the verdict of guilty was not authorized. Judgment reversed.

G. G. Hall, for plaintiff in error. J. H. Price, solicitor, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

79 S.E. 225, 13 Ga. App. 452, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stewart-v-state-gactapp-1913.