Tarvestad v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
McMurray, Presiding Judge.
Defendant was indicted for being a habitual violator in that he did “operate a motor vehicle after having received notice that his driver’s license had been revoked as provided in O.C.G.A. 40-5-58 without having obtained a valid driver’s license after said revocation. ...” Defendant was tried before a jury and found guilty of the offense charged. This appeal followed the denial of defendant’s motion for new trial. Held:
Defendant contends the trial court erred in failing to give his orally requested charge on justification, OCGA § 16-3-20 (6). Defendant argues that…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Tarvestad v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1991
- Jones v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1996
- Tarvestad v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1991
- Tarvestad v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1991