Foster v. State
| Decision Date | 15 September 1943 |
| Docket Number | 30142. |
| Citation | 28 S.E.2d 81,70 Ga.App. 305 |
| Parties | FOSTER v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Rehearing Denied Dec. 13, 1943.
Syllabus by the Court.
The evidence for the State showed in part as follows: M. B Petty, a police officer, testified that he arrested the defendant, who was sitting in an automobile off Marietta Street near the railroad yards. The automobile contained a case of whisky in half pints and some whisky in pints. Another officer testified that at the time of Foster's arrest he and other officers were trying to find out how soldiers coming through on troop trains were getting liquor. ' The defendant's statement was as follows:
Frank A. Doughman, of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
John A. Boykin, Sol. Gen., Durwood T. Pye, and Lindley W. Camp., Sol., all of Atlanta, for defendant in error.
1. The accusation charged that the defendant "did sell as a retail dealer distilled spirits and alcohol without first obtaining a license from the State Revenue Commissioner." The Code, § 27-2303, provides: "Upon the trial of an indictment for any offense, the jury may find the accused not guilty of the offense charged in the indictment, but, if the evidence warrants it, guilty of an attempt to commit such offense, without any special count in the indictment for such attempt." The defendant was found guilty of an attempt to commit the offense charged in the accusation and the pleading and evidence authorized such a verdict.
2. The State introduced two former accusations on which the defendant was found guilty: (1) For controlling spirituous and alcoholic liquors, and (2) for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Gosselin
...States, 195 F.2d 721, 723, 13 Alaska 635 (9th Cir. 1952). See Wright, Federal Practice and Procedure, § 515 (1969); Foster v. State,70 Ga.App. 305, 306, 28 S.E.2d 81 (1943); State v. Allen, 163 Kan. 374, 375, 183 P.2d 458 (1947); State v. Tellock, 273 Minn. 512, 513--514, 142 N.W.2d 64 (196......
-
Johnson v. State
...the state has legislated to be a crime, and his example is correct, but it has no application to this case. See Foster v. State, 70 Ga.App. 305(2), 28 S.E.2d 81 (1943). The defendant was not contending that he did the act for some other reason than that put forward by the state (a straight ......
-
Thomas v. State
...to illustrate, characterize, and explain the defendant's act, which was capable of more than one construction." Foster v. State, 70 Ga.App. 305, 307(2), 28 S.E.2d 81, 82 (1943). Thus, in the case at bar, the evidence of the previous incident was not admitted for the sole purpose of showing ......
-
Hobbs v. State, 27321
...was not error. Williams v. State, 62 Ga.App. 679(3), 9 S.E.2d 697; Enzor v. State, 63 Ga.App. 79(2), 10 S.E.2d 213; Foster v. State, 70 Ga.App. 305(3), 28 S.E.2d 81; Collier v. State, 72 Ga.App. 96(1), 33 S.E.2d 4. The trial court did not err in permitting the State to re-open its case for ......