Allen v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Allen v. State

139 S.E. 95, 37 Ga. App. 94, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 484

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 14, 1927

Docket18124

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 139 S.E. 95 (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, 139 S.E. 95, 37 Ga. App. 94, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 484 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodworti-i, J.

The motion for a new trial contains the general grounds only. “The decision of every issue of fact is exclusively for the jury.” Davis v. Kirkland, 1 Ga. App. 5 (1) (58 S. E. 209). “No principle of law is founded upon better reason or has been more strictly adhered to by this court than that the jury are the proper judges of the weight and sufficiency of-testimony and of the credibility of witnesses, and this court will not disturb the verdict of a jury where there is evidence to support its findings. Stricklin v. Crawley, 1 Ga. App. 139 (58 S. E. 215); Charles v. Brooker, 1 Ga. App. 219 (58 S. E. 218); Daughtry v. S. & S. Ry. Co., 1 Ga. App. 393 (58 S. E. 230).” Unity Cotton Mills v. Hasty, 19 Ga. App. 590 (2) (91 S. E. 916). There is some evidence to support the verdict, and “whenever there is any evidence,however slight, to support a verdict which has been approved by the trial judge, this court is absolutely without authority to control the judgment of the trial court.” Bradham v. State, 21 Ga. App. 510 (94 S. E. 618).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Bloodworti-i, J.

The motion for a new trial contains the general grounds only. “The decision of every issue of fact is exclusively for the jury.” Davis v. Kirkland, 1 Ga. App. 5 (1) (58 S. E. 209). “No principle of law is founded upon better reason or has been more strictly adhered to by this court than that the jury are the proper judges of the weight and sufficiency of-testimony and of the credibility of witnesses, and this court will not disturb the verdict of a jury where there is evidence to support its findings. Stricklin v. Crawley, 1 Ga. App. 139 (58 S. E. 215); Charles v. Brooker, 1 Ga. App. 219 (58 S. E. 218); Daughtry v. S. & S. Ry. Co., 1 Ga. App. 393 (58 S. E. 230).” Unity Cotton Mills v. Hasty, 19 Ga. App. 590 (2) (91 S. E. 916). There is some evidence to support the verdict, and “whenever there is any evidence,however slight, to support a verdict which has been approved by the trial judge, this court is absolutely without authority to control the judgment of the trial court.” Bradham v. State, 21 Ga. App. 510 (94 S. E. 618).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 S.E. 95, 37 Ga. App. 94, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 484, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allen-v-state-gactapp-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack