Case ID: ga-app_11/html/0242-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Russell, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

4040.
    Wood v. The State.
    Decided June 5, 1912.
    Indictment for larceny after trust; from Haralson superior court —Judge Price Edwards. January 17, 1912.
    
      Robinson & Edwards, W. W. Mundy, for plaintiff in error.
    
      J. R Hutcheson, solicitor-general, Griffith & Matthews, contra.
   Russell, J.

1. While in criminal cases the question of intent is one entirely for the jury, yet where, from all of the facts and circumstances in the case, an intent to defraud is not reasonably deducible, there can be no conviction of an offense of which an intent to defraud is necessarily an essential element.

2. Applying to the facts of the present case the principle above stated, the conviction of the accused was not authorized, and a new trial should have been granted. Judgment reversed.