Mekins v. State
Mekins v. State
Opinion of the Court
The motion for a new trial in each of these eases was overruled on the 19th day of November, 1928. The bills of exceptions assigning error on these rulings were each presented to the trial judge on the 17th day of December, 1928. This not being within the twenty days prescribed by law, this court is without jurisdiction to entertain the cases. Watson v. State, 38 Ga. App. 435 (144 S. E. 142), and cit.; Jennings v. State, 38 Ga. App. 454 (144 S. E. 147).
Writs of error dismissed.
070rehearing
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.
In the motion for a rehearing in this case it is stated that counsel for movant had five criminal cases from Wilkes superior court, in each of which he had made a motion for a new trial; that on November 26, 1928, he saw Judge Perryman at the court-house in Washington, and at that time the judge had the “records in all live of the cases, and called attention of counsel for movant to the fact that he had overruled his motions, and called for a pen to date same. Counsel for movant naturally thinking that these motions were overruled on the date above mentioned, November 26, 1928, and as a matter of fact only the cases of Tutt and Panning bear date of November 26, 1928, as the date of the overruling of the motions for new trial, . . and neither movant nor his counsel had any knowledge of the fact that November 26, 1928, was nob the true dale of the overruling of all these motions, including, of course, the motion in this case. And the twenty days after the true date overruling this motion had expired before either movant or his counsel knew that November 26th was not the true dale of the overruling of this motion.” (Italics ours.) Should
Rehearing denied.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.