Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

54 Ga. App. 207

Laminack v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 11, 1936

Court of Appeals of Georgia · decided 1936-09-11

Relies on State v. Pavelich · Conner v. State · Green v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1936-09-11

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently October 1972

1 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

4019361940195019601970decided

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 →

Broyles, C. J.

¶11. Where one has stolen an automobile and is transporting it away from where it was stolen, another person who, knowing that tile oar has been stolen, assists the thief in the asportation of the stolen property, is guilty as a principal in the offense committed. Green v. State, 114 Ga. 918 (3) (41 S. E. 55); Conner v. State, 25 Ga. 515 (5), 521, 522 (71 Am. D. 184); Brown v. State, 7 Okl. Cr. 678 (126 Pac. 263, 265); Devine v. State, 132 Miss. 492 (96 So. 696); Good v. State, 21 Okl. Cr. 328 (207 Pac. 565, 29 A. L. R. 1029, 1031); Moeller v. People, 70 Colo. 223 (11) (199 Pac. 414) ; State v. Behrens, 153 Wash. 380 (2) (279 Pac. 607).

¶22. Applying the foregoing ruling to the facts of the instant case, the conviction of the accused was authorized. The special grounds of the motion for new trial are merely elaborations of the general grounds. The court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial.

¶3Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.
/54/gaapp/207 · .json · Public domain