Case ID: ga-app_25/html/0596-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Stephens, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

11135.
    Pittman et al. v. Dorsey, Governor.
    Forfeiture of recognizance; from Fannin superior court—'Judge Morris. October 22, 1919.
    
      Clay & Giles, for plaintiffs in error.
    
      John T. Dorsey, solicitor-general, William Butt, contra.
   Stephens, J.

1. Motions for continuance being addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge, and the evidence in this case adduced upon the hearing of a motion for continuance being conflicting, the trial judge did not err in refusing to continue the case.

2. Where a scire facias issues against a principal and a surety upon a forfeited recognizance, the mere tender of additional bail, unaccepted and unapproved, is no defense against a final judgment. See, in this connection, Penal Code (1910), § 960; Griffin v. Moore, 2 Ga. 331; Williams v. Jenkins, 53 Ga. 166.

3. The trial judge, without the intervention of a jury, properly entered judgment absolute against the principal and the surety.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Smith, J., concur.