Summerour v. Cartrett
| Decision Date | 07 May 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 22465,22465 |
| Citation | 136 S.E.2d 724,220 Ga. 31 |
| Parties | H. C. SUMMEROUR v. Emory CARTRETT et al. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
J. E. Palmour, Gainesville, for plaintiff in error.
Merritt & Pruitt, J. Ray Merritt, Buford, for defendants in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court.
The bill of exceptions in the case sub judice raises the question of whether the trial judge erred in overruling a general demurrer to a petition for quo warranto, which sought that the office of Mayor of Dawsonville be declared vacant. The petition alleged that the respondent was acting in the capacity of mayor of the city without authority since he had been convicted of the crime of larceny after trust. Attached as an exhibit to the petition was a copy of the jury verdict finding the respondent guilty under an indictment for larceny after trust; however, no copy of the sentence entered upon such verdict was so attached. The respondent, the plaintiff in error here, contends that the petition fails to show that he was 'convicted' of a crime within the meaning of Art. II, Sec. II, Par. I of the Georgia Constitution (Code Ann. § 2-801) which provides that the following classes of persons shall not be permitted to hold any office, to wit: 'Those who shall have been convicted in any court of competent jurisdiction of treason against the State, of embezzlement of public funds, malfeasance in office, bribery or larceny, or of any crime involving moral turpitude, punishable by the laws of this State with imprisonment in the penitentiary, unless such persons shall have been pardoned.' Held:
Cantrell v. State, 141, Ga. 98, 104, 80 S.E. 649, 652. The constitutional provision provides for forfeiture of the right to hold office upon being 'convicted.' Renfroe v. Colquitt, 74 Ga. 618 (2a). See Roby v. Newton, 121 Ga. 679, 682, 49 S.E. 694, 68 L.R.A. 601. Strictly construing the language of the constitutional provision the 'conviction' must be a final one. Hence, it is evident that if the jury's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Campbell v. State, 89-25
...and not its popular meaning, so that a conviction must be based upon a final judgment not subject to review. Summerour v. Cartrett, [220 Ga. 31, 136 S.E.2d 724 (1964) ] supra. Commonwealth v. Reading, 336 Pa. 165, 6 A.2d 776 (1939); People v. Fabian, 192 N.Y. 443, 85 N.E. 672, 18 LRA (ns) 6......
-
State v. Wagenius
...definition to be applied is not always uniform, but varies with the particular law or statute under consideration. Summerour v. Cartrett, 220 Ga. 31, 136 S.E.2d 724 (1964). Our prior decisions have not been totally consistent and, for that matter, neither has the legislation upon which they......
-
State v. Blazer
...or other appropriate procedure, there would be no conviction within the meaning of the constitutional provision." Summerour v. Cartrett, 220 Ga. 31, 136 S.E.2d 724, 725 (1964). The term is not defined in the statutes here under consideration. Neither is it defined in the Class X statutes pr......
-
Barrett v. State, 95-M-01240-SCT
...Rubenstein Int'l v. Younger, 71 Cal.App.3d 406, 139 Cal.Rptr. 473 (1977); Slawik v. Folsom, 410 A.2d 512 (Del.1979); Summerour v. Cartrett, 220 Ga. 31, 136 S.E.2d 724 (1964); Grogan v. Lisinski, 113 Ill.App.3d 276, 68 Ill.Dec. 854, 446 N.E.2d 1251 (1983); Keogh v. Wagner, 20 App.Div.2d 380,......