Smith v. State
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion
ON MOTION TOR REHEARING.
Counsel for the plaintiff in error insist that the Caison case, supra, is in contemplation of law, and of section 6-1611 of the Code, “a unanimous decision rendered . . by a full bench of six” Justices, and that thisacourt is without authority to disapprove it. That séction declares that decisions by a full bench of six Justices shall not be overruled or materially modified, except with the concurrence of six Justices, etc. In the case last referred to, Russell, C. J., and Gilbert, J., were marked as concurring in 'the result. This is not the equivalent of concurring…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Durousseau v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1810
- New v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Buel v. Van NessSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
- Raleigh v. . BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- Atlanta & West Point Railroad v. HemmingsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941