Washington v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Washington v. State

42 Ga. App. 253

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 8, 1930

Docket20752, 20753

StatusPublished

This text of 42 Ga. App. 253 (Washington 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

Washington v. State, 42 Ga. App. 253 (Ga. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. “In order for this court to review a refusal to sanction a petition for certiorari, the petition must be incorporated in the bill of exceptions or otherwise verified as a part thereof by the trial judge; an unsanetioned petition can not be specified as part of the record.” Hall v. State, 2 Ga. App. 437 (58 S. E. 558), and cases cited.

2. “This court can not consider, as a part of the bill of exceptions or of the record, a paper which is attached to the bill of exceptions and which follows the judge’s certificate, though it bears the endorsement ‘ considered and denied,’ signed by the judge of the superior court.” Hollingsworth v. City of College Park, 17 Ga. App. 372 (86 S. E. 945).

3. Under the above-stated rulings and the- facts of the instant eases, the bills of exceptions can not be entertained by this court, and in each case the writ of error must be

Dismissed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. “In order for this court to review a refusal to sanction a petition for certiorari, the petition must be incorporated in the bill of exceptions or otherwise verified as a part thereof by the trial judge; an unsanetioned petition can not be specified as part of the record.” Hall v. State, 2 Ga. App. 437 (58 S. E. 558), and cases cited.

2. “This court can not consider, as a part of the bill of exceptions or of the record, a paper which is attached to the bill of exceptions and which follows the judge’s certificate, though it bears the endorsement ‘ considered and denied,’ signed by the judge of the superior court.” Hollingsworth v. City of College Park, 17 Ga. App. 372 (86 S. E. 945).

3. Under the above-stated rulings and the- facts of the instant eases, the bills of exceptions can not be entertained by this court, and in each case the writ of error must be

Dismissed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 Ga. App. 253, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/washington-v-state-gactapp-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack