Thomas v. State

176 S.E. 155, 49 Ga. App. 484, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 443
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 17, 1934
Docket23667
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 176 S.E. 155 (Thomas 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
Thomas v. State, 176 S.E. 155, 49 Ga. App. 484, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 443 (Ga. Ct. App. 1934).

Opinions

Broyles, C. J.

1. It is a misdemeanor for any person in this State to have in his possession any quantity of beer, lager beer, or near-beer, or any liquor, beverage or drink made in imitation of or intended as a substitute for beer, whether or not such beer, lager beer, near-beer, liquor, beverage or drink is alcoholic or intoxicating. Watters v. State, 42 Ga. App. 292 (155 S. E. 780), and cit.

2. Under the foregoing ruling, the undisputed evidence for the State (the defendant introduced no evidence and made no statement to the jury) demanded the defendant’s conviction on the second count of the indictment, which charged that he was in possession of “what is known as 3.2 beer, the same having the appearance of beer and smells like beer and [485]*485tastes like beer hud has the color and general appearance of beer.” See Watters v. State, supra.

Decided September 17, 1934. Porter & Mebme, for plaintiff in error. James F. Kelly, solicitor-general, J. Ralph Rosser, contra.

3. The court did not err in charging and recharging the jury that whether or not the beverage in question was alcoholic or intoxicating was not a question for their determination. The charge was not subject to the criticism that it amounted to an expression of the court’s opinion that the defendant was guilty of the offense charged, and was not erroneous for any other reason assigned.

4. The other special assignments of error are expressly abandoned in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Guerry, J., concurs specially. MacIntyre, J., dissents.

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

Related

Lundy v. State
58 S.E.2d 240 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1950)
Bowie Martin Inc. v. Dews
35 S.E.2d 577 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1945)
McGee v. Bennett
33 S.E.2d 577 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1945)
Elmore v. State
29 S.E.2d 713 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1944)
Edwards v. Atlanta, Birmingham & Coast Railroad
10 S.E.2d 449 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1940)
Donahoo v. Goldin
7 S.E.2d 820 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1940)
Cammons v. State
2 S.E.2d 205 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1939)
Daniels v. State
199 S.E. 572 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1938)
Martin v. State
195 S.E. 313 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1938)
American Surety Co. v. Smith
191 S.E. 137 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
176 S.E. 155, 49 Ga. App. 484, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 443, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-state-gactapp-1934.