Nobles v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Accusation of misdemeanor; from city court of Dublin — Judge Sturgis. July 30, 1931. One of the grounds of the motion for a new trial is as follows: “ Movant contends that he is entitled to a new trial for the reason that in the beginning of his trial he put the State on notice that he waived no rights guaranteed him under the laws of the State of Georgia and the constitution of the State and of the United States, except arraignment; but, notwithstanding this, movant,…
Read the full summary
Accusation of misdemeanor; from city court of Dublin — Judge Sturgis. July 30, 1931. One of the grounds of the motion for a new trial is as follows: “ Movant contends that he is entitled to a new trial for the reason that in the beginning of his trial he put the State on notice that he waived no rights guaranteed him under the laws of the State of Georgia and the constitution of the State and of the United States, except arraignment; but, notwithstanding this, movant, defendant in trial, was tried before a jury of only eight citizens; that defendant, on being furnished with a list of the jury…
1Opinion of the CourtLukb, J.
1. The defendant in this case Avas arraigned upon an accusation in the city court of Dublin, charging him with a violation of the prohibition statute. In due time the defendant stated that he “ waived nothing. ” A full panel of jurors Avas not put upon him to strike from, and his case was tried before eight jurors, instead of tAvelve. Ilis assignment of error is upon the ground that he was entitled to a full panel of jurors, and that therefore *653his conviction by eight jurors was illegal. We agree with the contention of the defendant; and it was error for this reason to overrule his motion for…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Amerson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916