Moody v. State case brief
320 S.E.2d 545
Subject: Animal Law
CASE SYNOPSIS:
Fifty-nine defendants appealed a judgment from the Bacon Superior Court (Georgia), which overruled a motion quash an indictment charging defendants with violating the dogfighting statute, O.C.G.A. § 16-12-37.
FACTS: The trial court denied a motion to quash an indictment charging defendants with violating O.C.G.A. § 16-12-3, and the court granted an interlocutory appeal.
HOLDING:
The court ruled the statute was not overly broad for failing to delineate permissible conduct.
ANALYSIS:
-The court had held that the statute required knowing and consensual involvement in dogfighting, therefore the statute required intent.
-The court further ruled that the law prohibited participation by gambling on the act, and the statute did not infringe on constitutionally protected conduct.
CONCLUSION: The court affirmed.
Fifty-nine defendants appealed a judgment from the Bacon Superior Court (Georgia), which overruled a motion quash an indictment charging defendants with violating the dogfighting statute, O.C.G.A. § 16-12-37.
FACTS: The trial court denied a motion to quash an indictment charging defendants with violating O.C.G.A. § 16-12-3, and the court granted an interlocutory appeal.
HOLDING:
The court ruled the statute was not overly broad for failing to delineate permissible conduct.
ANALYSIS:
-The court had held that the statute required knowing and consensual involvement in dogfighting, therefore the statute required intent.
-The court further ruled that the law prohibited participation by gambling on the act, and the statute did not infringe on constitutionally protected conduct.
CONCLUSION: The court affirmed.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment