Whitehead v. State

144 S.E. 135, 38 Ga. App. 437, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 275
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJuly 31, 1928
Docket19038
StatusPublished

This text of 144 S.E. 135 (Whitehead 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
Whitehead v. State, 144 S.E. 135, 38 Ga. App. 437, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 275 (Ga. Ct. App. 1928).

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

Where two defendants, -after being separately indicted, are by consent tried together, and separate verdicts of guilty arc returned, and separate motions for new trials are filed, and the court passes separate written orders overruling the motions, the defendants can not bring their cases to this court in one bill of exceptions. Washington v. State, 32 Ga. App. 72 (122 S. E. 629); Wall v. Mann, 163 Ga. 42 (135 S. E. 407). “For want of jurisdiction in such a case, this court can not entertain a motion made by one of the plaintiffs in error that his name be stricken from the bill of exceptions and that the case proceed in the name of the other plaintiff in error.” Center v. Fickett Paper Co., 117 Ga. 222 (2) (43 S. E. 498); Wall v. Mann, supra.

Writ of error dismissed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., eoneur.

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

Related

Center v. Fickett Paper Co.
43 S.E. 498 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1903)
Wall v. Mann
135 S.E. 407 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1926)
Washington v. State
122 S.E. 629 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
144 S.E. 135, 38 Ga. App. 437, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 275, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whitehead-v-state-gactapp-1928.