Conley v. State
| Decision Date | 21 October 1889 |
| Citation | 10 S.E. 123,83 Ga. 496 |
| Parties | CONLEY v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Error from city court of Atlanta; VAN EPPS. Judge.
D. P Hill, H. P. Wright, and J. L. Hopkins & Sons, for plaintiff in error.
Arnold & Arnold and F. M. O' Bryan, for the State.
The only assignment of error which is necessary to be considered and decided in this case is the complaint of the plaintiff in error that the court erred in allowing the accusation to be amended so as to charge the offense as having been committed in the county of Fulton, this having been omitted in the original accusation, and it appearing that the accused had been put upon his trial, a jury selected, all the testimony submitted, and argument of counsel to some extent heard, when this amendment was allowed, and the case proceeded without any proof being offered other than that which had already been submitted to the court. The offense in this case was created by the act of 1871, (Acts 1871-72, p. 71,) and the acts amendatory thereof. Code, §§ 4600-4601 a; Acts 1887, p. 37. The accusation takes the place of an indictment. We know of no practice or decision of any court of this state allowing proceedings of this sort to be amended under the circumstances of this case. The constitution provides that a person accused of crime shall be tried in the county where the crime was committed. This court has held from the first that it is necessary for the state to prove that the crime was committed in the county where the trial was had, and upon failure to do this, new trials have been awarded. If it is necessary to prove the county in which the crime was committed, and that it was in the same county in which the trial is proceeding, it would seem to be essential that the indictment or accusation which charges the crime upon the defendant should also allege that the crime was committed in the county in which such indictment or accusation is proceeding. Without it the indictment or accusation is demurrable, and in this case a motion in arrest of judgment would have been good. No person can be put on trial for an offense which is not prescribed by the legislature. Our statute of amendments does not apply to accusations. The solicitor of the city court, before trial of a criminal case and before the selection of a jury, can at any time amend the accusation as he may deem proper; but it is too late to amend after the party has been put upon his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chancey v. State
... ... As authority in support of their argument, appellants cite only to the rule, applied in cases exemplified by Conley v. State, 83 Ga. 496, 10 S.E. 123 (1889), that in a prosecution for a crime the indictment must allege that the crime was committed in the county where the prosecution is proceeding. See also State v. Ramos, 145 Ga.App. 301, [256 Ga. 423] 243 S.E.2d 693 (1978). The reason for this rule is that, ... ...
-
Wright v. State, S04A0551.
...offense, the indictment is void. He certainly could raise that issue in the context of a motion in arrest of judgment. Conley v. State, 83 Ga. 496, 10 S.E. 123 (1889); Brown v. State, 181 Ga.App. 865, 354 S.E.2d 169 (1987). As the majority correctly notes, however, it is now too late for Wr......
-
Conley v. Redwine
...been before this court in various shapes and at several different times. See Conley v. Thornton, 81 Ga. 154, 7 S. E. 127; Same v. State, 83 Ga. 496, 10 S. E. 123; Id., 85 Ga. 348, 11 S. E. 659; Same v. Maher, 93 Ga. 781, 20 S. E. 647; Same v. Arnold, 93 Ga. 823, 20 S. E. 762; Same v. Buck, ......
-
Flanders v. State
...also, Hall v. State, 8 Ga.App. 747(2), 70 S.E. 211; Hall v. State, 120 Ga. 142, 47 S.E. 519; Moseley v. State, 74 Ga. 404; Conley v. State, 8o Ga. 496, 10 S.E. 123.' Pines v. State, 15 Ga.App. 348(1), 83 S.E. 198. See also Hightower v. State, 39 Ga.App. 674(1), 148 S.E. 300; Sanders v. Stat......