Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

20 Ga. 674

Davis v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided August 15, 1856

Supreme Court of Georgia · decided 1856-08-15

Indictment for playing and betting at cards, in Cherokee ■ Superior Court. Tried before Judge Brown, April Term, 1856. At the April Term, 1854, of Cherokee Superior Court, the Grand Jury found a presentment against Joseph Davis for playing and betting at cards, on the 10th day of February, 1854. At the April Term, 1855, the Grand Jury returned a special presentment against Davis for playing and betting at cards on the 4th day of April, 1855.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1856-08-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently June 1971

8 state decisions

201856186018701880189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1By the Court.

Lumpkin, J.

¶2delivering the opinion.

¶3'[!•] Assuming that the mistake existed, ought the Court :to have permitted it to be shown ? We think so, most clearly. We know of no limit to the power of the Court to rectify errors in its own proceedings, provided third persons are not prejudiced.

¶4Are not the judgments of this Court — of all Courts — constantly corrected ? And should they not be until they speak the truth ? And what injury can result from allowing this to be done ? The defendant pleads guilty to the presentment of April, 1854, the oldest and first found against him, and puta •the State upon proof of the other two.

¶5*676Should a citizen be imprisoned in the penitentiary under Such circumstances ? There are two indictments against him —one for an assault, and the other for an assault with intent to murder. 1’y mistake, he pleads guilty to the last, instead of the first. The bare suggestion shocks the' common understanding of every man. And if this would not be tolerated, why should he he prosecuted for gaming, or any other crime upon a confession of guilt, which he never intended to make ?

¶6As to whether or not the mistake exists, it is a question for the Jury; and the fact of the entry being made on the presentment and on the minutes, is only prima facie evidence, and imposes upon the defendant the burden of establishing his case by proof.

/20/ga/674 · .json · Public domain