Allen v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Allen v. State

92 S.E. 948, 20 Ga. App. 184, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 790

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 13, 1917

Docket8751

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 92 S.E. 948 (Allen v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals 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, 92 S.E. 948, 20 Ga. App. 184, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 790 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Wade, C. J.

The motion for a new trial is based upon the general grounds only, and it is insisted in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error that there was no evidence to authorize a verdict of manslaughter. There was testimony from some of the witnesses for the defendant to the effect that immediately before the fatal shot was fired by the accused, the deceased made a violent assault upon him, seizing him by the collar, choking him, and making threats to kill him. This evidence authorized the submission of the law of manslaughter to the jury, and it was for them to determine whether or not the actual assault made upon the defendant was sufficient to justify the excitement of passion and exclude all idea of deliberation or malice. Duhart v. State, 14 Ga. App. 563, 565 (81 S. E. 813). The evidence authorized the verdict, and the trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

George and Dulce, JJ., concur.

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

Wade, C. J.

The motion for a new trial is based upon the general grounds only, and it is insisted in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error that there was no evidence to authorize a verdict of manslaughter. There was testimony from some of the witnesses for the defendant to the effect that immediately before the fatal shot was fired by the accused, the deceased made a violent assault upon him, seizing him by the collar, choking him, and making threats to kill him. This evidence authorized the submission of the law of manslaughter to the jury, and it was for them to determine whether or not the actual assault made upon the defendant was sufficient to justify the excitement of passion and exclude all idea of deliberation or malice. Duhart v. State, 14 Ga. App. 563, 565 (81 S. E. 813). The evidence authorized the verdict, and the trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

George and Dulce, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 S.E. 948, 20 Ga. App. 184, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 790, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allen-v-state-gactapp-1917.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack