Taylor v. State

Decision Date16 December 1931
Docket Number21602.
Citation161 S.E. 793,44 Ga.App. 387
PartiesTAYLOR v. STATE.
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

Syllabus by the Court.

Indictment charging clerk of city council with acceptance of bribe to influence clerk's official behavior in stamping transmitting, and certifying ordinance held sufficient as relating to clerk's official duties (Laws 1874, pp. 118, 119, 144, § § 10, 13, 134).

Refusal to direct verdict is not error.

Request to charge is properly refused, where not strictly adjusted to evidence and argumentative.

Requested instruction that defendant, clerk of city council could lawfully render service in undertaking to influence council members' vote held properly refused in bribery prosecution.

Official act, though unlawful, will render officer liable for bribery if official in form, and done under color of office.

Requested instruction that clerk of city council was not guilty of bribery if he received money by pretending to represent claim of fictitious person against city held properly refused under evidence.

Clerk of city council held "officer of government of this state" as alleged in indictment, and "officer of this state," as provided by statute denouncing bribery (Pen. Code 1910, § § 270, 271).

Charge in bribery prosecution that officer might be bribed to do his duty held harmless.

Admission of testimony in bulk presents no cause for new trial, where some of testimony was unobjectionable.

Admission of testimony of mayor and former mayors as to manner in which clerk of council had been performing duties held not error in prosecution of clerk for bribery.

Voucher issued by city in settlement of litigation, and receipt therefor, held properly admitted in prosecution of clerk of council for accepting bribe in connection with resolution authorizing such settlement.

Resolution passed by city council held admissible in prosecution of clerk for accepting bribe to influence official behavior in connection with such resolution.

Admission of certified copy of ordinance over objection that defendant had never seen copy and that copy contained only facsimile signature held not error.

Admission of check held not error in bribery prosecution where it was claimed defendant received bribe from proceeds thereof.

Copy of mandate affirming judgment in city's favor held admissible in prosecution of clerk of council for accepting bribe in connection with resolution authorizing settlement of such litigation.

Evidence held to sustain conviction of clerk of city council for bribery.

The trial judge did not err in overruling the demurrer to the indictment. The evidence supports the verdict; and no ground of the motion for a new trial presents any valid reason for reversing the judgment.

Error from Superior Court, Fulton County; Edgar E. Pomeroy, Judge.

Walter C. Taylor was convicted of bribery, and he brings error.

Affirmed.

STEPHENS J., dissenting.

Arnold, Arnold & Gambrell, of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.

John A. Boykin, Sol. Gen., J. W. Le Craw, and Wm. Schley Howard, all of Atlanta, for the State.

LUKE J.

The indictment in this case contains three counts, each charging Walter C. Taylor with the offense of bribery. The verdict was: "We, the jury, find the defendant guilty." The first question for determination is whether the court erred in overruling the demurrer to the indictment. The other questions presented are raised by the exception to the judgment overruling defendant's motion for a new trial, containing the usual general grounds and sixty-five other grounds.

Count 1 charges Walter C. Taylor with the offense of bribery, "for that said accused, in the County of Fulton and State of Georgia, on the 2 day of July, 1927, *** being then and there Clerk of Council of the City of Atlanta, *** and, as such, being in a position of confidence, trust, and clerkship in the Legislative Department of the City of Atlanta, composed of the 'Mayor and General Council of the City of Atlanta,' said office being an office of government of this State, did unlawfully receive of and from George C. Spence $9,000 in money, as a present reward given to the said Taylor, to influence his official behavior in his said office above set forth, and received by him for said purpose; said giving and receiving of said present and reward being pursuant to and in consummation of a previous agreement and understanding between Taylor and Spence that said present and reward would be given in return for the services of the said Clerk of Council in obtaining from the City of Atlanta the sum of $30,000, 'in full settlement in suit of Thos. B. Brady v. City of Atlanta in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Northern Division,' and the purpose of the said unlawful agreement to give and receive said $9,000 as aforesaid, and the purpose for which said $9,000 was actually so paid and received in consummation of said agreement, included the influencing of the official behavior of accused as such Clerk of Council of the City of Atlanta, the official behavior of accused being that he procured the passage and adoption by General Council of a resolution authorizing said $30,000 settlement, that he procured the passage and adoption of said resolution first by Council of the City of Atlanta, that he then stamped said resolution 'adopted by Council,' with his official stamp, that he then transmitted said resolution so stamped as aforesaid to the Aldermanic Board of the City of Atlanta, that he then stamped the said resolution "concurred in' by said Aldermanic Board upon the said Aldermanic Board voting to concur therein, that he then transmitted said resolution so stamped as aforesaid to the Mayor of Atlanta; that he then transmitted and certified a copy of said resolution to the Comptroller of the City of Atlanta, after the Mayor's approval thereof; and accused then procured from the Comptroller of the City of Atlanta, the official check of the City of Atlanta for the $30,000 called for in said resolution, and delivered the same to George C. Spence, who was attorney for the said Thomas B. Brady; the said offense of bribery being unknown during the years 1927, 1928, and 1929, and not becoming known until some time subsequent to January 1, 1930, said resolution authorizing the said settlement of $30,000 above referred to being as follows:" (Here was set out said resolution "by councilman Moore," reciting that the terms of "said compromise" were "set forth in written communications from Spence and Spence, attorneys for the plaintiff, dated May 2 and May 10, 1927, addressed to Hon Frank H. Neely, Chairman Bond Commission, a copy of said communications being hereto attached.") We deem it unnecessary to set out said communications.

The indictment next sets out numerous ordinances prescribing the duties of the clerk of council. The following is the gist of some of them: Section 735. The clerk shall attend all meetings of the general council and aldermen, and keep a correct record of their proceedings. Section 736. The clerk shall issue all licenses, as hereinafter pointed out, and all orders, summonses, notices, or other instruments, which may be required of him by the mayor and general council. Section 737. He shall keep a book of minutes, and other records including an ordinance book and a book in which he shall record all petitions for street work, etc. Section 742. He shall have an official seal, which shall be affixed to all documents certified to by him. Section 744. He shall make copies of all ordinances, except ordinances for construction of sewers, or for work of public improvement, and certify and transmit the same to the head of the department charged with the enforcement of such ordinance. Section 747. He shall notify any departments of the city of Atlanta of the passage of any resolutions or ordinances by the council affecting such departments, and also furnish them copies of the same. Section 1966. In all elections by general council the vote shall be taken viva voce on call of the roll by the clerk, and shall be entered on the minutes. Sections 1000 and 1001. It shall be the duty of the clerk to make preparations for holding all regular and special elections in the city, providing polling places, ballot boxes, booths, stationary, etc. Section 2032. He shall give bond in the sum of $10,000 to account to the city for all articles, goods, and moneys coming into his hands by virtue of his office, including books, papers, etc. Section 2048. No person holding a position or office under the city government shall act as attorney in any legal proceeding against said city, nor be employed as attorney or counsel in any matter or cause adversely to said city.

After setting out said ordinances, count 1 concluded as follows "And it also being *** among the official duties of accused in his said office as Clerk of Council to certify all official action by said General Council on ordinances and resolutions and resolutions upon the said ordinances and resolutions, and transmit the same so certified to the Mayor of Atlanta for his official action thereon, and the Mayor of Atlanta relied upon the correct performance of his duty by the Clerk of Council in passing upon ordinances and resolutions so transmitted to him by accused; and it was also the duty of said Clerk of Council to record the action of the Mayor thereon in the official records of the General Council kept by accused, said duties being established by custom and usage in the Legislative Department of the City of Atlanta; and it also being *** among the official duties of accused in his said office as Clerk of Council to certify all official action by Council of the City of Atlanta on resolutions and ordinances and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • State v. Hendricks
    • United States
    • Arizona Supreme Court
    • November 17, 1947
    ... ... 249, 54 L.Ed ... 569; United States v. Birdsall, 233 U.S. 223, 34 ... S.Ct. 512, 58 L.Ed. 930; Daniels v. United States, 9 ... Cir., 17 F.2d 339; Krichman v. United States, 2 ... Cir., 263 F. 538; ... [186 P.2d 948] ... McGrath v. United States, 2 Cir., 275 F. 294; ... Taylor v. State, 44 Ga.App. 387, 161 S.E. 793; ... People v. Markham, 64 Cal. 157, 30 P. 620, 49 ... Am.Rep. 700; Harris v. Superior Court, 51 Cal.App ... 15, 196 P. 895. Contra: State v. Hart, 136 Wash ... 278, 239 P. 834; State v. Butler, 178 Mo. 272, 77 ... S.W. 560; State v. Adams, ... ...
  • Taylor v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • December 16, 1931
  • Pruitt v. Progressive Life Ins. Co
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • March 12, 1937
    ... ... v. Kiker, 45 Ga.App. 706, 165 S.E. 850; Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Burson, 50 Ga.App. 859, 861 (7), (8), 179 S.E. 390; Taylor v. State, 44 Ga.App. 387, 161 S.E. 793; Sovereign Camp, Woodmen of the World, v. Simmons, 33 Ga.App. 566, 126 S.E. 891. The court erred in ... ...
  • Pruitt v. Progressive Life Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • March 12, 1937
    ... ... v ... Kiker, 45 Ga.App. 706, 165 S.E. 850; Mutual Life ... Insurance Co. v. Burson, 50 Ga.App. 859, 861 (7), (8), ... 179 S.E. 390; Taylor v. State, 44 Ga.App. 387, 161 ... S.E. 793; Sovereign Camp, Woodmen of the World, v ... Simmons, 33 Ga.App. 566, 126 S.E. 891 ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT