Harris v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtBloodworth, J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) The indictment is so vague and indefinite that it does not inform the accused of the exact transaction for which he is indicted. It “does not set out whose agent defendant claimed to be, or whom he claimed to represent in taking orders for clothing,” nor does it “set out any facts so as to enable this defendant to prepare his defense.” In Burkes v. State, 7 Ga. App. 39 (65 S. E. 1091), Chief Judge Hill (p. 42) quoted with approval the following from Archbold’s Or. Pr. & PL: “It is an elementary principle of criminal pleading that where the definition of an…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wingard v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1853
- Carter v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1913
- Burkes v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1909
- Roughlin v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1915
3Cited by10 opinions
- State v. BlackCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1979
- Dixon v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1990
- Mealor v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
- Dotson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
- Burke v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.