Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Sutton v. State

Sutton v. State

168 S.E. 911, 46 Ga. App. 664, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 170
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 24, 1933
Docket22893
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 168 S.E. 911 (Sutton 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
Sutton v. State, 168 S.E. 911, 46 Ga. App. 664, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 170 (Ga. Ct. App. 1933).

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

On the call of the case the defendant made a motion for a continuance, based upon the absence of an alleged material witness for his defense. The motion complied with all the requirements of section 987 of the Penal Code of 1910, and there was no counter-showing by the State. Under the foregoing facts the refusal .to grant the continuance was error. In the motion for a new trial counsel for the defendant properly assigned error on such refusal. Exceptions pendente lite to such a judgment are not necessary.

Judgment reversed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Miller v. State
430 S.E.2d 159 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1993)
Frost v. State
86 S.E.2d 646 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1955)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
168 S.E. 911, 46 Ga. App. 664, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sutton-v-state-gactapp-1933.