Case ID: ga-app_65/html/0761-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Broyles, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

29053.
    JONES v. THE STATE.
    Decided September 12, 1941.
    
      G. G. Battle, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Bond Almand, solicitor,' John A. Boykin, solicitor-general, Bur-wood T. Eye, contra.
   Broyles, C. J.

Georgia Jones was convicted, in the criminal court of Fulton County, of the offense of possessing two gallons of non-taxpaid whisky. Her certiorari was overruled by a judge of' the superior court, and she excepted to that judgment. George W. Slate, a city policeman, was the only witness in the case, and his-testimony is set out in paragraph 5 of the petition for certiorari as follows: “That he along with other officers went to 702 DeKalbAvenue and found the defendant and others at the house. That the house had a hall running from the front to the rear. There-were rooms on either side of the hall. That on the left side of the-hall in the fireplace or chimney they found two gallons of non-tax-paid whisky which did not bear the revenue stamps required by the-revenue act of Georgia as provided in such eases. That so far as-he knew others besides the defendant lived in the house.” The-trial judge, in his untraversed and unexcepted-to answer, made the-following statement: “Respondent admits that the testimony set-out in paragraph 5 of the petition is substantially as delivered on-the trial of the ease, with the following qualifications and exceptions: Officer Slate further testified in the case that the place-where the two gallons of whisky were found was in Fulton County, Georgia, on the 2nd day of August, 1940; that the whisky was found in a smokestack in the fireplace, and that the defendant told' officer Slate where it was and further stated to him that it was her whisky; and that it was found in the house where she lived.” No-witness testified for the defendant, but she stated “that she did not know anything about the whisky; that it was not hers; that others-lived in the house, and that she was not guilty.” The evidence-authorized her conviction, and the overruling of the certiorari was-not error.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and) Gardner, JJ., concur.