
    4011.
    Dunlap v. The State.
    Decided October 22, 1912.
    Accusation of carrying pistol; from city court of Ocilla — Judge Oxford. January 16, 1912.
    The plaintiff in error was convicted of a violation of the act of 1910 as to carrying a pistol without a license. His motion for a new trial, the refusal of which is assigned as error, alleged that .the verdict was contrary to law and the evidence, and that the court erred in refusing written requests to charge the jury as follows: “If you believe, from the evidence and the defendant’s statement, that the defendant, as he claims, went to see his son in another county, and found the son in possession of the pistol in question, and took it away from the son because he, the father, did not want the boy to have the pistol, and had started to bring the pistol from the point where he took it from the son, to his own home, and was apprehended by the officer and the pistol taken from him as testified to by the State’s witness, while he was so engaged in carrying the pistol home, then I charge you that he would not be guilty, and it would be your duty to acquit him.” Also: “If you believe, from the evidence and the statement of the defendant, that the defendant, on the occasion in question, was carrying the pistol solely for the purpose of transporting, then he would not be guilty.”
   Russell, J.

The decision in this case is controlled by the ruling of this court in Cheney v. State, 10 Ga. App. 451 (73 S. E. 617).

Judgment affirmed.

Newbern & Meeks, for plaintiff in error.

H. J. Quincey, solicitor, contra.  