Rudulph v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Indictment for misdemeanor; from Camden superior court —'Judge Highsmith. June 1, 1921. The indictment charged Harry Rudulph with having wilfully engaged “in an act of cruelty to a domestic animal belonging to John Brazell, said animal being a dog and the said Harry Rudulph wilfully and negligently running over said dog .with an automobile and thereby killing it.”
Read the full summary
Indictment for misdemeanor; from Camden superior court —'Judge Highsmith. June 1, 1921. The indictment charged Harry Rudulph with having wilfully engaged “in an act of cruelty to a domestic animal belonging to John Brazell, said animal being a dog and the said Harry Rudulph wilfully and negligently running over said dog .with an automobile and thereby killing it.” The only witness was John Brazell, who testified that his dog was lying in the middle of a public road about 50 or 60 feet wide, in front of his house, when he first saw an automobile, driven by the defendant, which was about 50 or…
1Opinion of the CourtLuke, J.
Rudulph was convicted of the offense of cruelty to an animal. The evidence was sufficient to authorize the conviction; the verdict has the approval of the trial judge, and for no reason assigned was it error to overrule the motion for a new trial. See Moore v. State, 121 Ga. 194 (48 S. E. 919).
Judgment affirmed.
Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Moore v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
3Cited by1 opinion
- Maxwell v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934