Allen v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Allen v. State

38 S.E. 79, 112 Ga. 752, 1901 Ga. LEXIS 80

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 25, 1901

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 38 S.E. 79 (Allen v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Allen v. State, 38 S.E. 79, 112 Ga. 752, 1901 Ga. LEXIS 80 (Ga. 1901).

Pincite

Opinion

Lumpkin, P. J.

1. It was in. this case erroneous to refuse to grant a contmuanee, the ground of the motion therefor being the absence of a witness, and it appearing from the showing, which met all the legal requirements, that the testimony of this witness, if obtained, would, in connection with that of other witnesses, warrant a conclusion that the accused was not present at the commission of the crime charged in the indictment, and also that without the testimony of the absent witness the defense of alibi could not be completely established.

2. The judgment is reversed on that ground of the motion for a new trial assigning error upon the denial of a continuance. It does not appear from any of the other grounds of the motion that any material error was committed.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concurring, except Cobb, J., absent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Lumpkin, P. J.

1. It was in. this case erroneous to refuse to grant a contmuanee, the ground of the motion therefor being the absence of a witness, and it appearing from the showing, which met all the legal requirements, that the testimony of this witness, if obtained, would, in connection with that of other witnesses, warrant a conclusion that the accused was not present at the commission of the crime charged in the indictment, and also that without the testimony of the absent witness the defense of alibi could not be completely established.

2. The judgment is reversed on that ground of the motion for a new trial assigning error upon the denial of a continuance. It does not appear from any of the other grounds of the motion that any material error was committed.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concurring, except Cobb, J., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 S.E. 79, 112 Ga. 752, 1901 Ga. LEXIS 80, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allen-v-state-ga-1901.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack