Dowda v. The State Of Ga.

• Decision Date: 30 September 1883
• Citation: 71 Ga. 481
• Parties: Dowda. vs. The State of Georgia.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

71 Ga. 481

Dowda. vs. The State of Georgia.

Supreme Court of the State of Georgia

SEPTEMBER TERM, 1883.

Criminal Law. Continuance. Before Judge Hammond. DeKalb Superior Court. December Term, 1882.

On December 19, 1882, Dowda was indicted for seduction. The indictment charged that he seduced one Fannie Ragsdale, she being a virtuous, unmarried female, by false and fraudulent means. On December 20, 1882, the case was called, and the state announced ready. Defendant moved for a continuance, on the following grounds: He had been recently committed to jail; he was informed a short time before the calling of the case that a true bill had been found against him; he expected his attorney, L. J. Gartrell, Esq., whom his friends had employed to defend him, to be present, but was disappointed; the charges against him were grave ones, and to be forced to trial represented by counsel who had just been informed as to the facts of the case, would be unjust both to defendant and his counsel; he had two witnesses, James Holston, who resided at Temple, on the Georgia Pacific Railway, and Dick Thompson, who resided in Atlanta, both residing within the jurisdiction of the court, and by whom he could prove that Fannie Ragsdale was not, at the time of the offence imputed to him, a virtuous female; he knew no other person present by whom he could prove that fact, and he expected their attendance at the next term of the court; their evidence was material to his case; it was not known to him until recently that an adjourned term wouldbe held, and being confined, he had no opportunity to prepare his case.

The court allowed a postponement of the case until noon of the next day, and ordered subpoenas to be issued for the witnesses, and that an officer be dispatched for them. On the following day, at half past twelve o'clock, the case was again called, and neither the witnesses nor the officer had been heard from. Defendant made a motion for a continuance, which contained the same grounds as the first motion, and added that he was sick and unable to undergo a trial, and because of this sickness he did not have the use of his reasoning faculties. The court ordered the defendant to be examined by a physician. Dr. J. H. Goss examined him, and reported as follows: " The defendant, W. T. Dowda, seems in his usual health, but his general appearance indicates that he may have some affliction, but not of such a nature as would prevent his undergoing a trial; that he has some excitement of pulse and heart action, that may be...