Thurmond v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Thurmond v. State

200 S.E. 807, 59 Ga. App. 333, 1939 Ga. App. LEXIS 5

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 16, 1939

Docket27329

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 200 S.E. 807 (Thurmond 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

Thurmond v. State, 200 S.E. 807, 59 Ga. App. 333, 1939 Ga. App. LEXIS 5 (Ga. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Guerry, J.

1. “Until there has been a judgment finally disposing of the case in the trial court, the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to pass upon an assignment of error complaining of the striking of a plea of former jeopardy, filed by the accused.” McElroy v. State, 123 Ga. 546 (51 S. E. 596); Johnson v. Battle, 120 Ga. 649 (48 S. E. 128); Johnson v. Merchants & Farmers Bank, 141 Ga. 721 (81 S. E. 873); Hightower v. State, 22 Ga. App. 276 (95 S. E. 873); Giles v. State, 34 Ga. App. 201 (129 S. E. 12); Vaughn v. State, 38 Ga. App. 438 (144 S. E. 223); Bazemore v. State, 35 Ga. App. 570 (134 S. E. 335); Denmark v. State, 41 Ga. App. 470 (153 S. E. 430); Blackwell v. State, 46 Ga. App. 830 (169 S. E. 507).

3. The assignment of error in the present case is upon the order overruling the plea of former jeopardy. No exception to the final judgment is taken, and it does not appear from the record that the defendant was tried a second time. “While the defendant in error has made no motion to dismiss the bill of exceptions, it is nevertheless the duty of this court to raise the question of its jurisdiction, and, when its lack of jurisdiction appears, to dismiss the bill of exceptions.” Blackwell v. State, supra.

3. Under the foregoing rulings and the facts of this case, this court is without jurisdiction and the writ of error must be and is

Dismissed.

Broyles, G. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

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

Guerry, J.

1. “Until there has been a judgment finally disposing of the case in the trial court, the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to pass upon an assignment of error complaining of the striking of a plea of former jeopardy, filed by the accused.” McElroy v. State, 123 Ga. 546 (51 S. E. 596); Johnson v. Battle, 120 Ga. 649 (48 S. E. 128); Johnson v. Merchants & Farmers Bank, 141 Ga. 721 (81 S. E. 873); Hightower v. State, 22 Ga. App. 276 (95 S. E. 873); Giles v. State, 34 Ga. App. 201 (129 S. E. 12); Vaughn v. State, 38 Ga. App. 438 (144 S. E. 223); Bazemore v. State, 35 Ga. App. 570 (134 S. E. 335); Denmark v. State, 41 Ga. App. 470 (153 S. E. 430); Blackwell v. State, 46 Ga. App. 830 (169 S. E. 507).

3. The assignment of error in the present case is upon the order overruling the plea of former jeopardy. No exception to the final judgment is taken, and it does not appear from the record that the defendant was tried a second time. “While the defendant in error has made no motion to dismiss the bill of exceptions, it is nevertheless the duty of this court to raise the question of its jurisdiction, and, when its lack of jurisdiction appears, to dismiss the bill of exceptions.” Blackwell v. State, supra.

3. Under the foregoing rulings and the facts of this case, this court is without jurisdiction and the writ of error must be and is

Dismissed.

Broyles, G. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 S.E. 807, 59 Ga. App. 333, 1939 Ga. App. LEXIS 5, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thurmond-v-state-gactapp-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack