Eubanks v. State, 21479
| Decision Date | 08 February 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 21479,21479 |
| Citation | 124 S.E.2d 269,217 Ga. 588 |
| Parties | John Robert EUBANKS et al. v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
1. An indictment which charges a defendant with the commission of a crime in the language of a valid statute is sufficient to put the defendant on notice of the charge against him.
2. The act of 1949 (Ga.L.1949, pp. 1118-1122) is not unconstitutional and void as contended by the defendants.
Twitty & Twitty, Frank S. Twitty. Jr., Camilla, for plaintiff in error.
Maston O'Neal, Sol. Gen., Bainbridge, for defendant in error.
John Robert Eubanks and Jim Roger Ricks were indicted under the act of 1949 (Ga.L.1949, pp. 1118-1122, Code Ann. § 26-2213) and charged with 'the offense of Burning to Defraud Insurer.' Their demurrer to the indictment was overruled, and the exception is to this judgment.
1. The indictment charged the defendants with the crime of 'burning to defraud insurer' in the language of the act, and the first ground of demurrer, asserting that the indictment fails to charge the defendants 'with the commission of a crime,' can not be sustained, unless it be determined that the act of 1949 is unconstitutional and void as contended in grounds 2 and 3 of the demurrer.
In ground 4 of the demurrer it is asserted that the indictment fails to allege who was the owner of the automobile. In ground 5 it is asserted that it fails to allege the number of the insurance policy, the date it was issued, and in whose name the policy was issued. In ground 6 it is asserted that the indictment does not allege payment of the premium and that the policy was in full force and effect at the time the automobile was destroyed by fire, and in ground 7 it is asserted that no loss is shown to have been suffered by the insurance company.
The offense charged against the defendants is in the language of the statute, and this is sufficient under the law. Cohen v. State, 104 Ga. 734, 30 S.E. 932; Bazemore v. State, 121 Ga. 619, 49 S.E. 701; Ramsey v. State, 212 Ga. 381, 92 S.E.2d 866; Buchanan v. State, 215 Ga. 791, 113 S.E.2d 609.
2. In ground 2 of the demurrer it is contended that the act of 1949 (Ga.L.1949, pp. 1118-1122) is unconstitutional and void as being in violation of Art. III, Sec. VII, Par. VIII (Code Ann. § 2-1908) of the Constitution, 'in that said act refers to more than one subject matter and contains matter different from what is expressed in the title thereof.'
The title of the 1949 act is as follows: 'An Act to repeal Sections 26-2208, 26-2209, 26-2210 and 26-2211, relating to the crime of arson and the punishment therefor, and to enact other sections relating to said crime or the attempt thereat and prescribing the punishment therefor; and to enact other laws relating to the kindling of fire on one's land or that of another and prescribing the punishment therefor; and for other purposes.'
The only crime mentioned in the title of the 1949 act is arson. Notice is given of the repeal of certain sections and of the intention 'to enact other sections relating to said crime.' This language is sufficient to meet the requirements of Art. III, Sec. VII, Par. VIII (Code Ann. § 2-1908) of the Constitution. The general object of the law is all that need be indicated by the title or caption of the act, and a synopsis of the law is not required to be in the title. White v. Donalson, 170 Ga. 432, 436, 153 S.E. 19; Morgan v. Shepherd, 171 Ga. 33, 37, 154 S.E. 780; Cade v. State, 207 Ga. 135, 138, 60 S.E.2d 763; Complete Auto Transit Inc. v. Floyd, 214 Ga. 232, 236, 104 S.E.2d 208).
'Provisions germane to the general subject-matter...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Herrin v. State
...quash for lack of sufficient specifications. See in this connection Buchanan v. State, 215 Ga. 791(3), 113 S.E.2d 609; Eubanks v. State, 217 Ga. 588(1), 124 S.E.2d 269; Schulman v. State, 94 Ga.App. 489, 95 S.E.2d 2. The general rule is that evidence of guilt is not restricted to the day me......
-
Nelson v. Southern Guaranty Ins. Co.
...other purposes.' This caption contains no language indicating that the insurance law described is amended generally. See Eubanks v. State, 217 Ga. 588, 124 S.E.2d 269. It states specifically that Code Ch. 56-407 is amended 'so as to provide' coverage for the protection of the insured agains......
-
McDonald v. State
...of the statute and hence was not subject to general demurrer. Buchanan v. State, 215 Ga. 791(3), 113 S.E.2d 609; Eubanks v. State, 217 Ga. 588(1), 124 S.E.2d 269; Schulman v. State, 94 Ga.App. 489, 95 S.E.2d 343. In this connection, the defendant argues that the statute requires that one wi......
-
Dye v. State
...technical and correct to withstand a general demurrer. Stewart v. State, 246 Ga. 70, 268 S.E.2d 906 (1980); Eubanks v. State, 217 Ga. 588, 124 S.E.2d 269 (1962). See also OCGA § 17-7-54. Here, the indictment charged appellant with the unlawful possession of cocaine on May 21, 1984 and it co......