From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Senase v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia
Oct 20, 1988
258 Ga. 592 (Ga. 1988)

Opinion

45657.

DECIDED OCTOBER 20, 1988.

Drug violation. Gordon Superior Court. Before Judge White.

Thomas C. Blaska, Jonathan J. Wade, for appellant.

Darrell E. Wilson, District Attorney, Kimberly L. Schwartz, for appellee.


After the appellant, Roger Fred Senase, was convicted and sentenced for trafficking in cocaine, OCGA § 16-13-31, he appealed to the Georgia Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals transferred his appeal to this court, apparently because his enumeration of errors included several constitutional challenges to § 16-13-31. However, our review of the record shows that Senase did not raise these constitutional issues in the trial court, and hence has forfeited the right to raise them on appeal. Arp v. State, 249 Ga. 403 (1) ( 291 S.E.2d 495) (1982).

The transfer order of the Court of Appeals did not specify the reason for transfer.

The basis of this court's jurisdiction to review the judgment complained of being predicated upon the drawing into question of the constitutionality of a statute of this State and the record failing to show that such point was passed upon by the trial judge, this court is without jurisdiction. The case is therefore transferred to the Court of Appeals. [Cits.]

Undercofler v. United States Steel Corp., 219 Ga. 264 ( 133 S.E.2d 11) (1963).

Transferred to the Court of Appeals. All the Justices concur.


DECIDED OCTOBER 20, 1988.


Summaries of

Senase v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia
Oct 20, 1988
258 Ga. 592 (Ga. 1988)
Case details for

Senase v. State

Case Details

Full title:SENASE v. THE STATE

Court:Supreme Court of Georgia

Date published: Oct 20, 1988

Citations

258 Ga. 592 (Ga. 1988)
372 S.E.2d 813

Citing Cases

Williams v. Regency Hosp. Co.

Lane, 266 Ga. at 658 (1), 469 S.E.2d 22. See Senase v. State, 258 Ga. 592, 372 S.E.2d 813 (1988). A ruling in…

State v. Horsley

The Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction where an attack on the constitutionality of a statute was not…