Legal Opinion
State v. Houston
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided February 4, 1975No. 50060PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Stolz, Judge.
Pursuant to the provisions of Code Ann. § 6-1001a (a) (Ga. L. 1973, pp. 297, 298), the state appeals from the sustaining of the accused’s pretrial motion to quash his indictment for robbery on the ground that counsel was not appointed to represent him prior to a preliminary hearing at which he was bound over to the grand jury.
1. A motion to quash, being the equivalent of a demurrer, is not a proper method of attacking an indictment for a defect not appearing upon its face, or setting up matters of fact outside of other pleadings and the record. See Jackson v. State, 64 Ga. 344…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Escobedo v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Clark v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1976
- State v. HoustonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1975
- Harbin Lumber Co. v. FowlerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
- Hightower v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
- Middlebrooks v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.