Hampton v. Brown
Supreme Court of Georgia
Seire facias, on a forfeited recognizance, in Taylor Superior Court. Decision made by Judge Worrill, at the October Term, 1860. The only question in this case, arose upon the following state of facts, to-wit: At the April Term, 1859, of Taylor Superior Court, a bill of indictment was found and filed against Philip Hampton, charging him with being a “cheat and swindler,” and further alleging, “ that, on the 28th day of January, 1858, with intent to cheat and swindle one Bryan…
Read the full summary
Seire facias, on a forfeited recognizance, in Taylor Superior Court. Decision made by Judge Worrill, at the October Term, 1860. The only question in this case, arose upon the following state of facts, to-wit: At the April Term, 1859, of Taylor Superior Court, a bill of indictment was found and filed against Philip Hampton, charging him with being a “cheat and swindler,” and further alleging, “ that, on the 28th day of January, 1858, with intent to cheat and swindle one Bryan Ingram, did by false representations of his own respectability and mercantile correspondence and connections, obtain a…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Lumpkin, J.,
delivering the opinion.
The defendant was prosecuted under the 9th section of the 11th division of the Penal Code as a cheat and a swindler. (Cobb, 822.) He was arrested, and gave bond for his appearance to answer for the offense of cheating and defrauding. Forfeiting his recognizance, a scire facias was issued against him and his securities, to show cause "why judgment should not be entered up against them for the amount "of their bond. They showed for cause.: 1. That the bond 'did not specify any crime. 2. That there was a variance between the indictment and the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Mason v. TerrellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
- Vaughan v. CandlerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901