¶1I concur in all except the ruling contained in paragraph 3. I am of the opinion that the request to charge referred to therein was substantially a correct statement of the law, but concur in- the conclusion that it was properly refused by the trial judge. I do so, however, on the ground that it was covered in the general charge. ~
23 Ga. App. 768
Wooten v. State
Decided May 16, 1919
Court of Appeals of Georgia · decided 1919-05-16
Indictment for seduction; from Jeff Davis superior court— Judge Highsmith. September 4, 1918. The-requested charge referred to in paragraph 3 of the decision was, that “seduction is a felony involving a penalty of from one to twenty years in the penitentiary of Georgia, and where one is convicted of seduction the punishment can not be for a misdemeanor, nor by fine, nor otherwise except by sentence to a term in the penitentiary of Georgia.”
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 1933
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1919-05-16
View the full empirical analysis of this case →