Legal Opinion

Clardy v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 13, 1953No. 34476PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarlisle, J.

Headnote 1 requires no elaboration, and for the reason there stated special ground 10 (numbered 13) is not considered.

In an indictment for sodomy, under the provisions of Code § 26-5901, it is not necessary, as a part of the description of the offense, to state the age of the accused; and, where in such a case the indictment does in fact state that the defendant is a “man of more than 21 years,” such allegation is surplusage and need not be proved. See, in this connection, Murphy v. State, 67 Ga. App. 626 (21 S. E. 2d, 454). Nor was proof of the defendant’s age necessary to show his capacity…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Richardson v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1914
  2. Allen v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1942
  3. Turner v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1913
  4. Broadnax v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1896
  5. Murphy v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1942

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Adams v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2011
  2. Reeves v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1978
  3. Scales v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1984
  4. Monroe v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1953
  5. Laken v. General Seat & Back Manufacturing Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1959

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API