Wilson v. State

Decision Date26 April 1938
Docket NumberNo. 26704.,26704.
Citation57 Ga.App. 839,197 S.E. 48
PartiesWILSON. v. STATE.
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Evidence of a confession voluntarily made by the defendant is direct evidence of the highest character and, when corroborated by proof of the corpus delicti, is sufficient to authorize a conviction.

2. "Laws, after promulgation, are obligatory upon all inhabitants of this State, and ignorance of the law excuses no one." Code, § 102-105. Although criminal intent is a necessary element of crime, yet, where the jury has said such intent existed, and there was evidence to support their verdict, this court will not interfere with or reverse such findings.

3. The evidence warranted the verdict

Error from City Court of Savannah; B. B. Heery, Judge.

Katie Wilson was convicted of the misdemeanor of unlawfully keeping, maintaining, employing, and carrying on a certain scheme and device, other than a lottery, for the hazarding of money, the scheme and device being called a "clearing house, " and she brings error.

Judgment affirmed.

Ulmer & Dowell, of Savannah, for plaintiff in error.

Samuel A. Cann, Sol. Gen., and Andrew J. Ryan, Asst. Sol. Gen, both of Savannah, for the State.

MacINTYRE, Judge.

The defendant, Katie Wilson, was indicted for the commission of the misdemeanor of unlawfully keeping, maintaining, employing, and carrying on a certain scheme and device, other than a lottery, for the hazarding of money, said scheme and device being known as and called "clearing house." The jury returned a verdict of guilty and the judge pronounced sentence upon the defendant. The defendant filed a motion for new trial. The motion was overruled and denied, on which ruling the defendant assigns error based on the general grounds only.

The defendant sets up the defense that the alleged confession was not corroborated by either direct or circumstantial evidence, and, further, that the evidence showed no intent on the part of the defendant to violate the law but showed instead that as soon as she had knowledge that she was violating the law she discontinued her operations. In Morris v. State, 51 Ga.App. 16, 179 S.E. 418, this court held that evidence of a confession voluntarily made by the defendant is direct evidence of the highest character and, when corroborated by proof of the corpus delicti, is sufficient to authorize a conviction. See in this connection Berry v. State, 48 Ga.App. 303, 172 S.E. 647. The defendant by her own statement admitted that she had operated the "clearing house" and "boledo" (games of chance) for Mrs. O'Leary, but insisted that she had stopped before she was arrested. The arresting officer testified that he found the "clearing house" paraphernalia in the defendant's house, and that he saw his assistant find tickets (which were used in such games), in her house. Mrs. O'Leary, who was arrested at the same time, admitted that the defendant sold tickets for her for the "clearing-house" game, but that on Saturday before their arrests on Monday she had ordered the defendant to close up when she (Mrs. O'Leary) had discovered that this was an unlawful business. Louise Davis, who was arrested for the same offense and is now serving sentence therefor, testified that she was arrested on the same day for the same offense while she was on her way to meet the defendant and Mrs....

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Wilson v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 26 d2 Abril d2 1938
  • Serna v. the State., A10A2275.
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 17 d4 Março d4 2011
    ... ... See Hardin, 142 Ga.App. at 796(2), 237 S.E.2d 202. See also Murray v. State, 157 Ga.App. 596, 598599(4), 278 S.E.2d 2 (1981) (finding no fatal variance despite a discrepancy in the name of the chemical compound).14. See OCGA 161371(b) (21.1).15. OCGA 136.16. Wilson v. State, 57 Ga.App. 839, 841, 197 S.E. 48 (1938). See Mincey v. State, 303 Ga.App. 257, 257258, 692 S.E.2d 809 (2010).17. (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Riley v. State, 292 Ga.App. 202, 205(2), 663 S.E.2d 835 (2008).18. Cf. In the Interest of T.S., 211 Ga.App. 46, 47(2), 438 S.E.2d 159 ... ...

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