Legal Opinion

Jones v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 19, 1917No. 8856PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Indictment' for misdemeanor; from Lowndes superior court-judge Harrell presiding.

1Opinion of the CourtGeorge, J.

1. Exceptions pendente lite can not be considered unless error is assigned thereon either in the main bill of exceptions or in the reviewing court by counsel for plaintiff in error before argument begins. Kent v. State, 18 Ga. App. 30 (88 S. E. 913); Shaw v. Jones, 133 Ga. 446 (66 S. E. 240). The bill of exceptions recites that exceptions pendente lite were duly taken to the overruling of the demurrer to the indictment, but no assignment of error is made either in the bill of exceptions or in this court, and the judgment overruling the demurrer can not be considered.

2. .The court did not err…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Shaw v. Jones, Newton & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1909
  2. Smith v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916
  3. Kent v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Reddick v. StricklandCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1920
  2. Tift v. Shiver & AultmanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1919
  3. Duren v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
  4. Finley v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1920

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

Powered by the Exa API