Legal Opinion

Manning v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided November 14, 1923No. 14819Published

1Opinion of the CourtBloodworth, J.

1. Plaintiff in error was accused of having “in his possession, custody, and control a quantity of spirituous, malt, vinous, fermented, and intoxicating liquors.” On the trial the judge instructed the jury, “If you believe from the evidence, and beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant Ed Manning did, on the date alleged in the accusation or at any time two years prior to the filing thereof, have a bottle in his possession, custody, pr control, and that the bottle did contain spirituous, malt, vinous, *149or intoxicating liquors, it would make no difference whether the bottle and its contents…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. City of Atlanta v. ScipleCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
  2. Luke v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1921
  3. Warfield & Robinson v. YoungCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
  4. Joiner v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API