Case Name: Futch v. The State
Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1927-07-26
Citations: 37 Ga. App. 151
Docket Number: 18231
Parties: Futch v. The State.
Judges: Broyles, O. J., and Bloodioorth, J., concur. .
Reporter: Georgia Appeals Reports
Volume: 37
Pages: 151–151

Head Matter:
18231.
Futch v. The State.
Decided July 26, 1927.
C. L. Cowart, for plaintiff in error.
J. T. Grice, solicitor-general, contra.

Opinion:
Luke, J.
A bill of exceptions will not lie to a judgment overruling a motion for a new trial in a criminal ease where the only trial had was upon the issues raised by a plea in abatement, the verdict being against the plea. There is no difference in principle between a verdict finding against a plea in abatement, and a finding against such a plea by the judge (where, by consent, he passes upon the plea without the intervention of a jury), and it is well settled that the striking of a plea in abatement is not a "final" judgment within the meaning of section 6138 of the Civil Code of 1910. McElroy v. State, 123 Ga. 546 (51 S. E. 596); W. & A. R. Co. v. Williams, 146 Ga. 27 (90 S. E. 478); English v. Rosenkrantz, 150 Ga. 745 (105 S. E. 292). A plea of res judicata is a plea in abatement.
Writ of error dismissed.
Broyles, O. J., and Bloodioorth, J., concur. .