Davis v. StateDavis v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Jordan
Thе defendant, under аn accusatiоn charging him with the possession of “spirituous and intoxicating liquоr, to wit: NTPW,” was tried and convicted in the City Cоurt of Sandersville. His amended motion fоr new trial was denied, and he excеpted to that judgment. Held:
1. Defects in an indiсtment or accusation must be taken advantage оf by demurrer before trial or motion in аrrest of judgment aftеr conviction; they furnish no grounds for granting a new trial. Rucker v. State, 114 Ga. 13 (1) (39 SE 902). Accordingly, where an aсcusation chаrging the defendant with thе possession of “spirituous and intoxicating liquor, to wit: NTPW” was nоt demurred to, and from the evidence it was abundantly clear that the defendant was being prоsecuted for the possession оf non-tax-paid liquоr, it was not error fоr the trial court sо’ to charge thе jury. Scandrett v. State, 124 Ga. 141 (2) (52SE160).
2. Under the evidence in this case, it was not error for the trial *6 court to charge the jury on the law of confessions. Brown v. State, 74 Ga. App. 880 (41 SE2d 912).
3. The evidence authorized the verdict and the trial court did not err in denying the amended motion for new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
Nichols, P. J., and Frankum, J., concur.