Springer v. State

• Decision Date: 10 November 1904
• Citation: 48 S.E. 907,121 Ga. 155
• Parties: SPRINGER v. STATE.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

48 S.E. 907

121 Ga. 155

SPRINGER v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Georgia

November 10, 1904

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Proof that the criminal act was committed within two years of the finding of the indictment (the charge being a misdemeanor) is sufficient, though the month and day may not appear.

2. Evidence that a witness searched the person of the accused and discovered a concealed pistol on his person, is not rendered inadmissible because the witness may not have had a legal right to make the search.

3. The verdict was amply supported by the evidence.

Error from City Court of Carrollton; W. C. Hodnett, Judge.

John Springer was convicted of carrying concealed weapons, and brings error. Affirmed.

James Beall, for plaintiff in error.

S Halderness, Sol., and R. D. Jackson, for the State.

EVANS J.

John Springer was convicted in the city court of Carrollton of the offense of carrying a concealed weapon. Pending the trial he made a motion to rule out the testimony of a witness sworn in behalf of the state. This motion the court overruled, and its refusal to sustain the same is assigned as error. He also contends that the evidence for the state was insufficient to show his guilt, because it does not affirmatively appear that the offense was committed within two years preceding the finding of the indictment.

The indictment charged that the offense was committed on October 15, 1903, and was returned at the April term, 1904, of Carroll superior court. The witness stated that he could not remember exactly the date of the occurrence, but it was year before last; it may have been last year; it was in the fall of the year, but witness could not remember the date; he did not try to remember the date. The trial took place in July 1904. Whether the occurrence to which the witness testified was in the fall of 1903 or in the fall of 1902, the occurrence must have been within two years next preceding the finding of the indictment, and this fact was made to sufficiently appear.

The testimony which the court declined to rule out was as follows: "I am and was a policeman here in Carrollton, Ga., and while on duty some time back I had arrested two negroes, and was going with them to the calaboose, and while I was on the way with them I heard another negro hallooing down the streets, and after I had put up the two negroes I went to hunt the person I heard hallooing, and I found it was John Springer, the defendant here. He was drunk, and was going down Rome street, and I ran up behind him, and just as I overtook him he turned, facing me, and I caught him by both arms and he (defendant) put his hand back under his coat as if to draw a pistol, but I beat him to it, and took the pistol out of his pocket. I found the pistol in his pants pocket. It was concealed. He had on a pair of overall pants and a long coat over the pants that contained the pistol; and I took him, after I found the pistol, to the calaboose." The motion to rule out this testimony was based on the ground that "the...