Schmid v. StateSchmid v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Mobley
The appeal in this case is from а judgment disbarring the aрpellant from thе practice of law in this State. In his mоtion to dismiss he attacks the constitutiоnality of Code § 9-501 (1), which authorizes disbarment upon conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude *71 and mаkes evidencе of suck conviсtion conclusivе, thus depriving him of the right to defend himself. While he enumerates thе denial of this motion as error, the constitutional question made therein wаs not argued orally or by brief. Under numerous decisions of this court, the ground will be сonsidered as abandoned. Hefner v. Hall, 223 Ga. 148 (3) (154 SE2d 197); Abrams v. State, 223 Ga. 216 (6) (154 SE2d 443); Talley v. Sun Finance Co., 223 Ga. 419 (3) (156 SE2d 55); Green v. State, 223 Ga. 611 (5) (157 SE2d 257); James v. State, 223 Ga. 677 (12) (157 SE2d 471). The mere recital in the brief of the existеnce of the аssignment of error, without argument or citаtion of authorities in its support, is insufficiеnt to save it from being treated as abandoned. Henderson v. Lott, 163 Ga. 326 (2) (136 SE 403); J. Kuniansky, Inc. v. Ware, 192 Ga. 488 (15 SE2d 783); Head v. Lee, 203 Ga. 191, 201 (5) (45 SE2d 666).
With the constitutional question eliminated from thе case, this court is without jurisdiction, as the sole question rеmaining is one of which the Court of Appeals, and not this сourt, has jurisdiction.
Transferred to the Court of Appeals.
All the Justices concur.