Opinion · Court of Appeals of Georgia
Coe v. State
Coe v. State, 37 Ga. App. 82 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals of Georgia
- Jurisdiction
- Georgia
- Date
- 1927-07-14
- Topic
- bankruptcy
Bloodworti-i, J. The defendant was convicted of burglary. The verdict was based upon the fact that certain articles taken from the burglarized building were found in the recent possession of the accused. The motion for a new trial alleges that the-two articles identified as having been taken from the burglarized building “were not found in the possession of the defendant until after three months from the time of said burglary, and that the same was not such recent possession as was required by the law.” The judge submitted this question to the jury, and they found against this contention. In Shaneyfelt v.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Coe v. State. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 6 opinions
The defendant was convicted of burglary. The verdict was based upon the fact that certain articles taken from the burglarized building were found in the recent possession of the accused. The motion for a new trial alleges that the-two articles identified as having been taken from the burglarized building “were not found in the possession of the defendant until after three months from the time of said burglary, and that the same was not such recent possession as was required by the law.” The judge submitted this question to the jury, and they found against this contention. In Shaneyfelt v. State, 24 Ga. App. 555 (2) (101 S. E. 592), this court held: “Whether the inference of guilt which may arise from recent possession of stolen goods should be drawn where several weeks elapse between the theft and the finding of the
Judgment affirmed.
Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.