Court Opinion

ID: 9846869
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 03:49:46.9628+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:16:56.389296
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
In Division 7 of the foregoing opinion we held that defendants’ motion to dismiss a portion of the recidivist charges in the indictment constituted a plea in bar, the grant of which the state was statutorily permitted to appeal. The statute which provides for a plea in bar (Code Ann. § 27-1501) contemplates that such a plea be in writing and filed with the trial court upon arraignment and before pleading to the merits. Hall v. State, 103 Ga. 403 (29 SE 915) (1897). Defendants contend that because their motion to dismiss was made orally and after arraignment, said motion could not constitute a plea in bar.
*609We note that because defendants’ motion was neither written nor timely, a denial thereof by the trial court would have been authorized. See Hardwick v. State, 158 Ga. App. 154 (279 SE2d 253) (1981). However, we are not persuaded that these deficiencies as to the form of the motion had the effect of altering its substance. Regardless of its designation and timing, the purpose and effect of the subject motion was that of a plea in bar.

Judgment adhered to.