Yarbrough v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Yarbrough v. State

194 S.E. 832, 57 Ga. App. 168, 1938 Ga. App. LEXIS 506

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 6, 1938

Docket26514

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 194 S.E. 832 (Yarbrough 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

Yarbrough v. State, 194 S.E. 832, 57 Ga. App. 168, 1938 Ga. App. LEXIS 506 (Ga. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

Gueery, J.

, The defendant was convicted under an accusation charging him with operating an automobile on a public highway of this State while under the influence of intoxicating liquors and drugs. Several witnesses for the State testified positively that the defendant was drunk immediately before, at the time, and after he was arrested, driving an automobile on a public highway. In his statement to the jury, he denied being drunk. He admitted that he had taken one drink, which he contends was doped and “ran him crazy.” The jury saw fit to believe the overwhelming evidence for the State. No error of law is disclosed, and the verdict has the approval of the trial judge.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

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

Gueery, J.

, The defendant was convicted under an accusation charging him with operating an automobile on a public highway of this State while under the influence of intoxicating liquors and drugs. Several witnesses for the State testified positively that the defendant was drunk immediately before, at the time, and after he was arrested, driving an automobile on a public highway. In his statement to the jury, he denied being drunk. He admitted that he had taken one drink, which he contends was doped and “ran him crazy.” The jury saw fit to believe the overwhelming evidence for the State. No error of law is disclosed, and the verdict has the approval of the trial judge.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

194 S.E. 832, 57 Ga. App. 168, 1938 Ga. App. LEXIS 506, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yarbrough-v-state-gactapp-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack