Legal Opinion

Roberts v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 14, 1930No. 20174PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, C. J.

1. There was no material variance between the allegations of the indictment and' the proof because the indictment charged seduction of “Ila” Weaver, while the evidence showed that the name of the female in question was “Ira” Weaver. The names 11a and Ira are idem sonans. Roland v. State, 127 Ga. 401 (56 S. E. 412); Watkins v. State, 18 Ga. App. 500 (89 S. E. 624); Johnson v. State, 7 Ga. App. 551 (67 S. E. 224). This ruling disposes of special grounds 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 9 of the motion for a new trial.

2. One charged with seduction, and found guilty of adultery and fornication only, will not…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Roland v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
  2. Moulton v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916
  3. Watkins v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916
  4. Johnson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1910

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bowman v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1954
  2. Cox v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1980
  3. Cox v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1980

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API