White v. State
71 S.E. 879, 9 Ga. App. 558, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 227
Opinion
I. The State is not confined to the date alleged in the accusation in proving the crime, but may prove it as of any date within the period of limitations.
2. When the accusation charges the offense generally, the State need not rest its case on proof of a single transaction, but may prove or attempt to prove any number of transactions of the character charged in the accusation and included within its terms.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
White v. State, 71 S.E. 879, 9 Ga. App. 558, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 227 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).
71 S.E. 879 (White v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Burns v. State
195 S.E.2d 189 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1973)
McNabb v. State
171 S.E.2d 655 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1969)
Grantham v. State
160 S.E.2d 676 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1968)
Echols v. State
93 S.E.2d 186 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1956)
Drummond v. State
73 S.E.2d 43 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1952)
Daniel v. State
64 S.E.2d 690 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1951)
Duncan v. State
32 S.E.2d 435 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1944)
Cox v. State
21 S.E.2d 283 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1942)
Tolbert v. State
85 S.E. 267 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1915)