Vellis v. State

111 S.E. 683, 28 Ga. App. 468, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 612
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedApril 11, 1922
Docket13294
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 111 S.E. 683 (Vellis 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
Vellis v. State, 111 S.E. 683, 28 Ga. App. 468, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 612 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

1. In the city court of Atlanta the plaintiff in error pleaded guilty to and was sentenced under an accusation dated November 1, 1921, which charged that on October 31, 1921, he “ did have, control and possess spirituous and intoxicating liquors.” In the superior couit of Fulton county he was subsequently placed on trial under an indictment which was returned on the 7th day of November, 1921, and which charged a sale of liquor to a named person on October 29, 1921. He filed a plea of former jeopardy, which is in part as follows: “ This defendant having been placed in jeopardy upon the same ofíense as charged in this indictment in the criminal court of Atlanta, which said court, at said time, had jurisdiction of said offense, this defendant pleads said former jeopardy in bar and [ ?] further prosecution on said indict[469]*469ment, and prays this court that this his plea be sustained, and he be discharged from any other or further prosecution or liability in said case; that the charge in said accusation upon which he was tried in the criminal court of Atlanta on November 1st, 1921, is general in its allegations, and he cannot be placed in jeopardy on a charge of the same character and for the same offense where the commission was prior to November 1st, 1921, the date of said accusation.” Under the laws of Georgia, selling intoxicating liquor is a different and distinct offense from having, controlling, and possessing intoxicating liquors. This case is controlled in principle by the ruling in the case of Phillips v. State, 27 Ga. App. 1 (1) (107 S. E. 343 (1) ). The court did not err in striking the plea of former jeopardy.

2. The motion for a new trial contains the general grounds only, and the evidence amply supports the verdict.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Related

Thompkins v. State
191 S.E.2d 555 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1972)
Ivey v. State
71 S.E.2d 876 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1952)
Eoff v. State
234 S.W.2d 521 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1950)
Harris v. State
193 Ga. 109 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1941)
Winkler v. State
199 N.W. 457 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1924)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
111 S.E. 683, 28 Ga. App. 468, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 612, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vellis-v-state-gactapp-1922.