Roddenberry v. State, 35116
| Decision Date | 13 April 1954 |
| Docket Number | No. 35116,No. 2,35116,2 |
| Citation | 90 Ga.App. 66,82 S.E.2d 40 |
| Parties | RODDENBERRY v. The STATE |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Error from Superior Court, Appling County; Douglas F. Thomas, Judge.
Milton C. Grainger, Jack W. Ballenger, Baxley, for plaintiff in error.
W. Glenn Thomas, Sol. Gen., Jesup, for defendant in error.
Syllabus opinion by the Court.
The assignment of error in the sole special ground of the motion for new trial, that the defendant's right of cross-examination was abridged by the trial court's refusal to require the sheriff of the county to divulge the name of the 'decoy' who accompanied the revenue officer to the defendant's home, and was supposedly present at the time the defendant sold the whisky to the revenue agent, is determinative of this case; and upon this point this case is controlled by the decision reached this day in Crosby v. State, Ga.App., 82 S.E.2d 38.
Judgment reversed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Taylor v. State
...recent cases are those cited in Headnote 1, above. The older cases are Crosby v. State, 90 Ga.App. 63, 82 S.E.2d 38; Roddenberry v. State, 90 Ga.App. 66, 82 S.E.2d 40, and Smallwood v. State, 95 Ga.App. 766(1), 98 S.E.2d 602. In Butler v. State, 127 Ga.App. 539, 540(2), 194 S.E.2d 261, 263,......
-
Thornton v. State
...v. State, 101 Ga.App. 463, 465, 114 S.E.2d 142 (1960); Smallwood v. State, 95 Ga.App. 766(1), 98 S.E.2d 602 (1957); Roddenberry v. State, 90 Ga.App. 66, 82 S.E.2d 40 (1954)), until the United States Supreme Court held, in a case involving a decoy, that the due process concept of fundamental......
-
Wilson v. Hopper, 30048
...been pertinent to appellant's defense of entrapment. Smallwood v. State, 95 Ga.App. 766(1), 98 S.E.2d 602 (1957); Roddenberry v. State, 90 Ga.App. 66, 82 S.E.2d 40 (1954); Crosby v. State, 90 Ga.App. 63, 82 S.E.2d 38 (1954). By disclosing Davis' identity to appellant, the state fulfilled it......
-
Williams v. Mayor and Bd. of Aldermen of City of Atlanta
...Ga. 172, 84 S.E.2d 365; Anderson v. State, 72 Ga.App. 487, 34 S.E.2d 110; Crosby v. State, 90 Ga.App. 63, 82 S.E.2d 38; Roddenberry v. State, 90 Ga.App. 66, 82 S.E.2d 40; Hodges v. State, 98 Ga.App. 97(7), 104 S.E.2d 704 (rev'd on other grounds, 214 Ga. 614, 106 S.E.2d 795; Staggers v. Stat......