Faglier v. The State., 139 Ga. App. 104, 228 S.E.2d 25 (1976)

Georgia Court Of Appeals, (May 05, 1976)

Docket number: 52125
SUBMITTED

QUILLIAN, Judge. - SUBMITTED
Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/faglier-v-the-state-20476549
Id. vLex: VLEX-20476549

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Summary:

Judgment reversed. Deen, P. J., and Webb, J., concur.

Citations:

FeediconRSS What's this?

Cited by:

Georgia Court Of Appeals - Cook v. The State., 141 Ga. App. 241, 233 S.E.2d 60 (1977)

Text:

John H. Ruffin, Jr., for appellant.

The defendant was tried and convicted for the sale of malt beverages without having obtained a license or permit to deal in such beverages. Upon the overruling of her motion for new trial, appeal was taken to this court. Held:

1. The first enumeration of error complains that it was error to allow testimony as to the three certain coolers containing iced beer. Objection was made that the evidence had previously been ruled out on a motion to suppress.

The trial judge erred in allowing testimony regarding certain evidence which had been suppressed. Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U. S. 471 (14) (83 SC 407, 9 LE2d 441) (1963). See Code Ann. 27-313 (Ga. L. 1966, pp. 567, 571).

2. The grounds complaining of the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict are without merit. See Buchanan v. State, 81 Ga. App. 81 (57 SE2d 842); Fouts v. State, 96 Ga. App. 876 (101 SE2d 925). Here, in addition to circumstantial evidence, there was direct testimony that beer was being sold.

3. "Under a general accusation charging a specific misdemeanor as having been committed on a given date, the State is not confined to evidence of transactions that occurred on the date alleged, but may offer evidence of any transaction tending to establish the commission of the crime within two years prior to the filing of such accusation. A conviction or acquittal is a bar to conviction for any other commissions of the same crime by the defendant which were or could have been offered in evidence on this trial." Dickerson v. State, 91 Ga. App. 453, 454 (85 SE2d 782). Accord, Daniel v. State, 83 Ga. App. 733, 734 (64 SE2d 690).

The fifth enumeration of error is without merit.

4. A ground complaining of the admission of evidence to which no objection was interposed is without merit.

5. The remaining enumeration of error shows no violation of the accused's constitutional rights.

For the reason set forth in the first division, the judgment must be reversed.

Kenneth E. Goolsby, District Attorney, Dennis C. Sanders, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

1976

Other documents:
Urbanismo Resolucion de 28-03-2007 ayuntamiento de yuncos toledo por la que se anuncia la aprobacion definitiva del proyecto de re... | Vredegerecht van het tweede kanton Antwerpen Bij beschikking van de vrederech... | Las entidades de ahorro han concedido ya 46 millones de euros en microcreditos | 34 cfr 403.111 - how must funds be used under the secondary school vocational education program and the postsecondary and adult vocational education programs? | los sindicatos temen una reconversion en el sector del automovil | Acórdão Nº 70011100955 of Tribunal de Justiça do RS - Terceira Câmara Cível, of June 02, 2005 | despacho n.º 10520/2003 2ªsérie de 28 de maio de 2003 | Acórdão Nº 70014855332 of Tribunal de Justiça do RS Vigésima Primeira Câmara Cível of May 17 2006 | canada national parks act-order amending schedule 4 canada national parks act | N 1999.01.00.014866-6 of Tribunal Regional Federal da 1a Regiao of April 06 1999 N 1999.01.00.014866-6 of Tribuna...