Waters v. State, 35231
| Decision Date | 07 July 1954 |
| Docket Number | No. 35231,No. 2,35231,2 |
| Citation | 90 Ga.App. 329,83 S.E.2d 25 |
| Parties | WATERS v. STATE |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court.
A conviction for the violation of Code § 68-307, penalizing the operation of a motion vehicle while under the influence of intoxicants, is unauthorized where there is no evidence that the defendant wasintoxicated while driving the automobile, and it appears that, after he collided with the fender of a parked car, he parked his own vehicle and left the scene for a period of some 15 or 20 minutes; that at the time he left he did not appear to be intoxicated, but when he returned he was under the influence of liquor. Nor does the defendant's admission that he had two bottles of beer tend to establish the fact that he was driving under the influence of intoxicants when it does not appear whether the defendant drank the beer before or after he parked and left his automobile.
John A. Waters was convicted in the Criminal Court of Fulton County on an accusation charging him with operating an automobile on a public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The case was carried by writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of Fulton County, and the petition for certiorari denied. This judgment is assigned as error.
Leon S. Epstein, Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
Paul Webb, Sol. Gen., John I. Kelley, Robert O'Neal, Charlie O. Murphy, Atlanta, for defendant in error.
The only eyewitness to the occurrence testified for the State that he saw the defendant drive his car through a narrow place in the street and hit the fender of a car belonging toSam Lowe; that he then observed the defendant park his car and get out, and that at that time he did not stagger and did not appear to be drunk; that the defendant walked down the street and was gone about 15 or 20 minutes and then returned. The owner of the automobile and two police officers testified that, when they talked with the defendant about 15 or 20 minutes after the collision, he appeared to be intoxicated and to have the smell of alcohol on his breath. One of the witnesses testified that the defendant stated at the police court that he had had two bottles of beer, but did not say at what time he had had the beer, and the witness did not know whether he meant he had drunk it before the collision, or after the collision and before he returned to the scene. Thus, the admission of the defendant that had had two bottles of beer in no...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Townsend v. State, 47424
...112 S.E.2d 704; Williams v. State, 96 Ga.App. 833, 101 S.E.2d 747; Gunder v. State, 95 Ga.App. 176, 97 S.E.2d 381; and Waters v. State, 90 Ga.App. 329, 83 S.E.2d 25. These cases and others of like tenor were expressly disapproved by this court in the recent case of Stephens v. State, 127 Ga......
-
Stephens v. State, 47286
...16, 84 S.E.2d 591; Parrott v. State, 100 Ga.App. 652, 112 S.E.2d 271; Painter v. State, 101 Ga.App. 21, 112 S.E.2d 704; Waters v. State, 90 Ga.App. 329, 83 S.E.2d 25 and others of like tenor in which there were no confessions, but there were reversals because of an insufficiency of evidence......
-
Tutt v. State
...time after a wreck there is no evidence either way to show whether he was intoxicated before or at the time of the wreck. Waters v. State, 90 Ga.App. 329, 83 S.E.2d 25 is a case in point where it was held that the evidence 'does not, when considered in connection with . . . the absence of a......
-
Glisson v. State, 50056
...tend to sustain the defendant's argument with regard to circumstantial evidence in a drunk driving case (for example, Waters v. State, 90 Ga.App. 329, 83 S.E.2d 25; Gunder v. State, 95 Ga.App. 176, 97 S.E.2d 381; Parrott v. State, 100 Ga.App. 652, 112 S.E.2d 271), have been overruled. Steph......