Whipple v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Whipple v. State

73 S.E. 27, 10 Ga. App. 214, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 723

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 19, 1911

Docket3787

StatusPublished

This text of 73 S.E. 27 (Whipple 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

Whipple v. State, 73 S.E. 27, 10 Ga. App. 214, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 723 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

1. On the trial of an accusation in a city court, the solicitor, after the accused had been arraigned and the jury stricken and sworn, but before any evidence was introduced, made a formal amendment to the accusation, which was not then objected to by the accused. Subsequently, when testimony was offered to prove the truth of the amendment, the accused objected to the evidence, and then made an oral demurrer to the amendment to the accusation. Held, the objection to the amendment came too late. If good at all, the objection should have been interposed when the amendment was offered, and not delayed until after testimony had been offered in support of the allegation covered by the amendment. The delay in making the objection to the amendment operated as a waiver thereof.

2. The objections made to rulings on the admissibility of evidence are without merit. No error of law appears, and the verdict is fully supported by the evidence. Judgment affirmed.

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

Hill, C. J.

1. On the trial of an accusation in a city court, the solicitor, after the accused had been arraigned and the jury stricken and sworn, but before any evidence was introduced, made a formal amendment to the accusation, which was not then objected to by the accused. Subsequently, when testimony was offered to prove the truth of the amendment, the accused objected to the evidence, and then made an oral demurrer to the amendment to the accusation. Held, the objection to the amendment came too late. If good at all, the objection should have been interposed when the amendment was offered, and not delayed until after testimony had been offered in support of the allegation covered by the amendment. The delay in making the objection to the amendment operated as a waiver thereof.

2. The objections made to rulings on the admissibility of evidence are without merit. No error of law appears, and the verdict is fully supported by the evidence. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 S.E. 27, 10 Ga. App. 214, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 723, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whipple-v-state-gactapp-1911.