Legal Opinion

Ramer v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 19, 1948No. 31930PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTownsend, J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) The indictment in the instant case is couched in substantially the language of the Code, it shows plainly that the nature of the offense charged may be easily understood by the jury. Every indictment will be deemed sufficiently technical and correct which states the offense in the language of the Code, or so plainly that the nature of the offense charged may be easily understood by the jury. See Code, § 27-701; Knowles v. State, 166 Ga. 182(1) (142 S. E. 676); Lenhardt v. State, 37 Ga. App. 43 (138 S. E. 590).

The rule of law, that written contracts must be…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Price v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1947
  2. Towler v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1919
  3. Kicklighter v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1947
  4. Knowles v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1928
  5. Fire Ass'n v. CooperCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1927

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Stowe v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
  2. Bill v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
  3. Moore v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
  4. Heard v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1949
  5. Hampton v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977

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