Burgess v. State, 39 S.E. 294 (Ga. 1901). · Go Syfert
Search
Burgess v. State, 39 S.E. 294 (Ga. 1901). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
43 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 13 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Grube (ga, 2013-06-03)
Treatment trajectory · 1901 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1901 1963 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Grube (2×) also: Cited "see"
Ga. · 2013 · confidence medium
See Irwin, supra, 117 Ga. 722 ; Eaves v. State, 113 Ga. 749, 755 ( 39 SE 318 ) (1901).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hubbard v. State (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 1971 · confidence medium
But in Reich v. State, 63 Ga. 616 (2) a stringent condition is imposed upon the State, as follows: "Where the indictment sets out the names of the grand jurors who found it with reasonable accuracy, leaving no doubt of the identity of the person, any slight mistake in the names on the minutes is immaterial and may be corrected at any time.” (Emphasis supplied.) Is the name "Mrs. Hammond” set forth with "reasonable accuracy?” Does it "leave no doubt of the identity of the person?” Again, in Eaves v. State, 113 Ga. 749, 755 ( 39 SE 318 ) the Supreme Court states: "Tf a part only of a nam…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Glustrom v. State (2×)
Ga. · 1950 · confidence medium
In Eaves v. State, 113 Ga. 749, 754 ( 39 S. E. 318 ), it was said: "We hold that the State is without any right to a writ of error in a criminal case by either main or cross-bill of exceptions.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Stone v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 1947 · confidence medium
Minter v. State, supra; Richter v. State, 4 Ga. App. 274 (2) ( 61 S. E. 147 ); Hall v. State, 47 Ga. App. 833 ( 171 S. E. 727 ); Woody v. State, 113 Ga. 927 ( 39 S. E. 297 ); Eaves v. State, 113 Ga. 749, 757 ( 39 S. E. 318 ).
cited Cited "see" State v. Tyson
Ga. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Eaves v. State, 113 Ga. 749 , 753-754 ( 39 SE 318 ) (1901) (no writ of error lies in favor of the state in a criminal case).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Wright v. State (2×)
Ga. · 2004 · signal: compare · confidence medium
Compare Eaves v. State, 113 Ga. 749, 754 (3) ( 39 SE 318 ) (1901).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Howard v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 1987 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Eaves v. State, 113 Ga. 749 (1) ( 39 SE 318 ) (1901); Easterling v. State, 11 Ga. App. 134 (1) ( 74 SE 899 ) (1912).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Burgess
v.
State
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Jul 18, 1901.
39 S.E. 294
Duncan & Duncan, for plaintiff in error., William Brunson, solicitor-general, contra.
Lewis.
Published
Lewis, J.

The evidence, though entirely circumstantial, was amply sufficient to warrant the verdict. This being so, and it not being alleged that any error of law was committed in the county court wherein the case was tried, the judgment of the superior court overruling the certiorari sued out by the accused will not be disturbed.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.