Stone v. State
| Decision Date | 13 May 1947 |
| Docket Number | 15779. |
| Citation | 42 S.E.2d 727,202 Ga. 203 |
| Parties | STONE v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
The contention that the act under which the accused was convicted of a misdemeanor is unconstitutional having been made for the first time in a motion for new trial, and not by demurrer to the pleadings or by objections to the evidence or in some other appropriate way pending the trial, such constitutional question is not properly made so as to give this court jurisdiction, and accordingly the case is transferred to the Court of Appeals.
This case was transferred from the Court of Appeals, based upon the idea that this court, and not the Court of Appeals, has jurisdiction.
Upon an examination of the record it is found that, under the 10th and 11th grounds of the amended motion for new trial, an effort is made to raise the question of the constitutionality of a law. It appears that the accused was being tried for a misdemeanor under Acts 1943, p. 568, Code Ann.Supp. § 26-6203 et seq., and certain evidence as to the reputation of the house, and the woman who ran the house, was admitted over the objection that it was irrelevant, immaterial, not a component part of the crime, and that the accused could not be responsible for or chargeable with the reputation of the woman or of her house. In the two grounds of the amended motion for new trial, the accused, for the first time asserts that the act is unconstitutional for stated reasons.
Thomas A. Jacobs, Jr., of Macon, for plaintiff in error.
O. L Long, Sol., of Macon, for defendant in error.
ATKINSON Justice (after stating the foregoing facts).
'A question as to the constitutionality of a law can not be raised for the first time in a motion for a new trial, where it was not made either by demurrer to the pleadings, or by objections to evidence, or in some other appropriate way pending the trial. ' Hendry v. State, 147 Ga. 260(8), 93 S.E. 413, 414; Starling v. State, 149 Ga. 172,99 S.E. 619.
Under the ruling quoted above, no constitutional question is properly made, and the case is not otherwise one of which the Supreme Court has jurisdiction. Accordingly, direction is given that it be transferred to the Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction to determine it. Savannah Electric Co v. Thomas, 154 Ga. 258(1), 113 S.E. 806; Western & Atlantic R. v. Michael, 172 Ga. 561(1), 158 S.E. 426; Moore v. State 194 Ga. 561(1), 158 S.E. 426...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wright v. State of Georgia
...Ga. 172, 99 S.E. 619; Savannah Elec. Co. v. Thomas, 154 Ga. 258, 113 S.E. 806; Moore v. State, 194 Ga. 672, 22 S.E.2d 510; Stone v. State, 202 Ga. 203, 42 S.E.2d 727; Loomis v. State, 203 Ga. 394, 405, 47 S.E.2d 58, 64; Flynt v. Dumas, 205 Ga. 702, 54 S.E.2d 429; Corbin v. State, 212 Ga. 23......
-
Hall v. Scoggins
... ... and this is true regardless of whether the right to assert ... the defense of former jeopardy in a State court is one that ... comes within the due-process clause of the Fourteenth ... Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Nor is ... the ... ...
-
Baker v. State
..."(a) question as to the constitutionality of a law can not be raised for the first time in a motion for a new trial" Stone v. State, 202 Ga. 203, 204, 42 S.E.2d 727 (1947), we have more recently noted that a defendant cannot waive his right to litigate, by writ of habeas corpus, the constit......
-
Corbin v. State
...either by demurrer to the pleadings, or by objections to evidence, or in some other appropriate way, pending the trial." Stone v. State, 202 Ga. 203, 42 S.E.2d 727; Flynt v. Dumas, 205 Ga. 702, 54 S.E.2d 429; Tucker v. City of Atlanta, 211 Ga. 157, 84 S.E.2d 8. Special ground 8 alleges that......