Holliday v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Indictment for burglary; from Muscogee superior court—Judge Howard. September 19, 1918.
1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, P. J.
The plaintiff in error was convicted of the offense of burglary. The undisputed evidence showed that, shortly after the commission of the burglary, the stolen goods—the fruits of the burglary—were found in the defendant’s possession. The defendant made an explanation of his possession of the goods. It was entirely a question for the jury whether this explanation was satisfactory to them.
1. The following excerpt from the 'charge of the court was excepted to: “Where a burglary has been committed, and property which was in the house at the time of the burglary is soon thereafter, or recently…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Insurance Co. v. WeideSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Carter v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
- Jones v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
- Gravitt v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Tucker v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1876
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Merritt v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964
- Selph v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
- Drinkard v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1935
- State v. SolanoNebraska Supreme Court · 1967
- Hawkins v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1949
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.