
    30557.
    HUNNICUTT v. THE STATE.
    Decided September 21, 1944.
    
      
      B. B. Giles, James B. Venable, Frank A. Bowers, Jackson L. Barwick, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Bindley IF. Gamp, solicitor, John A. Boykin, solicitor-general, Durwood T. Bye, contra.
   MacIntyre, J.

Counsel for the defendant insists that there was not sufficient evidence to authorize the judge, trying the case without a jury, to find the defendant guilty of vagrancy, and, as the defendant was a married woman and it was not shown that her husband was “unable to support her,” she can not be convicted of vagrancy in violation of section 26-7001 of the Code.

The defendant, although she said that she was married to one Cecil Garrison and that he gave her $15 per week for her support, stated that she “went under the name of Anne Hunnicutt because we have been separated several times.” There was no evidence whatsoever that she was known or had ever been known as Mrs. Garrison. Furthermore, Lt. Hilderbrand testified, in part, as follows: “I know Anne Hunnicutt and have known her for several years. I know that she was arrested with a man named Cecil Garrison once and he said that she was his wife. Whereupon, Anne said, ‘You know damn well that is all off, Cecil; you know I divorced you.’ I have never known of her working anywhere.” Under the facts disclosed by the record we think that there was ample evidence to authorize the trial judge to find that the defendant was not married on the date charged in the accusation. The evidence authorized a finding that the defendant led an idle, immoral, and profligate life, had no property to support her, and was able to work and did not work. Code, § 26-7001. Cody v. State, 118 Ga. 784 (45 S. E. 622); Welborn v. State, 119 Ga. 429 (46 S. E. 645); Arwood v. State, 25 Ga. App. 482 (103 S. E. 726); Forrester v. State, 46 Ga. App. 658 (168 S. E. 791).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and Gardner, J., concur.  