Heard v. State

Heard v. the State

Heard v. State, 53 S.E.2d 233 (Ga. Ct. App. 1949)

Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia · State Appellate Courts
Decided: April 30, 1949
Docket: No. 32344.
Judges: MacIntyre, Gardner, Townsend
Citations: 53 S.E.2d 23379 Ga. App. 2021949 Ga. App. LEXIS 617

Cited by 4

Opinion of the Court — MacIntyre

MacIntyre, P. J.

1. Where an indictment was returned on September 7, 1948, proof of having or selling prohibited liquors at any time between September 7, 1948, and September 7, 1946, will support the allegations of the .indictment. As the indictment is for a violation of the prohibition statute, a misdemeanor, the statute of limitations governing this case is two years, and the State in making out its case is not confined to the day named in the indictment, but may prove the commission of the offense at any time within two years prior to the return of the indictment, and whether acquitted or convicted, the accused cannot be tried again for such an offense committed during the period of limitation governing the case on trial.

Cole v. State, 120 Ga. 485 (2) ( 48 S. E. 156 ).

2. Special ground 1. The assignment of error in this ground is too general and raises no question for determination by this court.

Owen v. State, 78 Ga. App.

558 ( 51 S. E. 2d, 602 ).

3. Special ground 5 is without merit. No one save the defendant and his wife resided in the home of the defendant nor was anyone else present when the officers saw and found the whisky in such home; and under the ruling in Scott v. State, 57

Ga. App.

489 (4) ( 195 S. E. 923 ), it was not error in this case to fail to charge the law of circumstantial evidence.

4. The other assignments of error are in principle controlled by the decision in Elder v. State, 68

Ga. App.

227 ( 22 S. E. 2d, 521 ), and we can add nothing to what has been said in that decision on the subject.

5. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Gardner and Townsend, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 4 cases

View all citing references →

State Appellate Courts4

Relies on it most ⓘ

Grogan v. State346 S.E.2d 378 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986)
Bowen v. State83 S.E.2d 211 (Ga. Ct. App. 1954)
Nelson v. State66 S.E.2d 751 (Ga. Ct. App. 1951)
Hawks v. State95 S.E.2d 764 (Ga. Ct. App. 1956)

Most recent

Grogan v. State346 S.E.2d 378 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986)
Hawks v. State95 S.E.2d 764 (Ga. Ct. App. 1956)
Bowen v. State83 S.E.2d 211 (Ga. Ct. App. 1954)
Nelson v. State66 S.E.2d 751 (Ga. Ct. App. 1951)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Cole v. State, 48 S.E. 156 (Ga. 1904)	46
	Scott v. State, 195 S.E. 923 (Ga. Ct. App. 1938)	17
	Owen v. State, 51 S.E.2d 602 (Ga. Ct. App. 1949)	14
	Elder v. State, 22 S.E.2d 521 (Ga. Ct. App. 1942)	4

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list