Fryer v. State
| Decision Date | 02 April 1913 |
| Docket Number | 4,333. |
| Citation | 77 S.E. 830,12 Ga.App. 533 |
| Parties | FRYER v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court.
The merits of the ruling of the court below upon the demurrer cannot be considered, because no exception pendente lite was filed at the time of the ruling, and the bill of exceptions was certified several months thereafter.
(a) Error in a ruling upon a demurrer cannot properly be made a ground of a motion for a new trial, but should be taken advantage of by direct exception.
An assignment of error to the effect that the verdict is contrary to certain instructions of the court amounts to nothing more than a general assignment of error that the verdict is contrary to law.
The evidence as to whether the notes were forged or genuine was in conflict, but the evidence in behalf of the state was sufficient to authorize a finding that those whose names purported to be signed to the notes had neither signed them nor authorized their execution; and though the defendant did not in person deliver to the bank the forged notes alleged to have been uttered and published by him as true, the circumstances in proof were sufficient to authorize the conclusion that he either transmitted them or caused them to be transmitted to the bank. The jury had a right to prefer the testimony in behalf of the state; and, giving the state's evidence this preference, the circumstances adduced are inconsistent with the theory of innocence.
The remaining assignments of error, not being argued in the briefs, must be treated as abandoned.
Error from Superior Court, Meriwether County; R. W. Freeman, Judge.
J. O Fryer was convicted of forgery, and he brings error. Affirmed.
M'Laughlin & Jones, of Greenville, and J. J. Bull & Son, of Oglethorpe for plaintiff in error.
J. R Terrell, Sol. Gen., of Greenville, for the State.
In approving the bill of exceptions, the trial judge certified that no exceptions pendente lite were filed to the rulings upon the demurrers to the indictment. The court passed upon the demurrers in February, and the bill of exceptions was not certified until July 2, 1912, and therefore the judgment upon the demurrers cannot be considered by this court. Wheeler v. State, 4 Ga.App. 325, 61 S.E. 409; Sconyers v State, 6 Ga.App. 804, 65 S.E. 814. Where error in ruling upon a demurrer in a criminal case is not made the ground of special exception preserved pendente lite, but is complained of in a bill of exceptions sued out upon the case as a whole after verdict, the bill of exceptions must be certified within 20 days from the ruling of which complaint is made. The plaintiff in error seeks to present the ruling of the court upon the demurrer as a ground of his motion for new trial. Of course, under the uniform rulings of the Supreme Court, as well as of this court, a ruling...
To continue reading
Request your trial