Askew v. State
| Decision Date | 02 April 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 3,No. 43429,43429,3 |
| Parties | Donald L. ASKEW v. The STATE |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
A. B. Parker, Carrollton, Howe & Murphy, Harold L. Murphy, Tallapoosa, for appellant.
Wright Lipford, Sol. Gen., Newnan, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
1. The brief filed by the appellant in this case does not meet the requirements of Rule 17(a)(1) and Rule 17(c)(3)(A) and Rule 17(c)(3)(B) of this court adopted by it on July 21, 1965, and effective August 1, 1965, in that there is no citation or reference to the record or transcript. Accordingly, under the decisions of the court in Strickland v. English, 115 Ga.App. 384(2), 154 S.E.2d 710 and Crider v. State, 115 Ga.App. 347(1), 154 S.E.2d 743 the enumerations of error for which there is no reference made in either the enumeration or the brief will be considered as abandoned.
2. Paragraph (a) of Section 17 of the Appellate Practice Act of 1965, Section 6 of the Act of 1966 (Ga.L.1965, pp. 18, 31; Ga.L.1966, pp. 493, 498; Code Ann. § 70-207), reads: The record in the present case does not disclose that the appellant made any objection pursuant to the requirements of the above section as to the giving and the failure to give the charges complained of. The requirements of Par. (c) of Sec. 17 not having been met, these alleged errors, therefore, present no question for review. See Strong v. Palmour, 113 Ga.App. 750, 149 S.E.2d 745; King v. Adams, 113 Ga.App. 708, 149 S.E.2d 548; Vogt v. Rice, 114 Ga.App. 251, 150 S.E.2d 691; Saint v. Ryan, 114 Ga.App. 489, 151 S.E.2d 826. Section 10 of the Act approved March 30, 1967 (Ga.L.1967, pp. 220, 225) purporting to amend the above section so that it would apply only to civil cases was rendered unconstitutional under the decision of the Supreme Court in Joiner v. State, 223 Ga. 367, 155 S.E.2d 8.
3. The evidence was sufficient to authorize the verdict. The trial court did not err in overruling the motion for new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Georgia Stainless Steel Corp. v. Bacon, 44608
...Realty Co., 117 Ga.App. 226, 160 S.E.2d 228; Brickle v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 117 Ga.App. 557, 161 S.E.2d 424; Askew v. State, 117 Ga.App. 647, 161 S.E.2d 445; Hall v. State, 117 Ga.App. 649, 161 S.E.2d 374; Jenkins v. Raiford, 117 Ga.App. 658(2), 161 S.E.2d 405; Norsworthy v. Knight, 117 ......
-
Jester v. State
...See: Rule 18(a), (c) (Code Ann. § 24-3618); Bode v. Northeast Realty Co., 117 Ga.App. 226(1), 160 S.E.2d 228; Askew v. State, 117 Ga.App. 647(1), 161 S.E.2d 445; Hall v. State, 117 Ga.App. 649(1), 161 S.E.2d 374. Here, appellant's brief contends these matters are shown in the transcript at ......
-
Sturgis v. State
...to follow Rule 18 as to structure and content. Bode v. Northeast Realty Co., 117 Ga.App. 226(1), 160 S.E.2d 228; Askew v. State, 117 Ga.App. 647(1), 161 S.E.2d 445; Hall v. State, 117 Ga.App. 649(1), 161 S.E.2d 2. Code Ann. § 26-506 provides: 'When the same conduct of an accused may establi......