Arnold v. State

114 S.E. 922, 29 Ga. App. 285, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 250
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided December 12, 1922·No. 13995·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

1. “ Exceptions to portions of tlie charge relating solely to the law of murder become immaterial where the verdict is not for murder, but for voluntary manslaughter.” Land v. State, 11 Ga. App. 761 (2) (76 S. E. 78); Thompson v. State, 24 Ga. App. 144 (2) (99 S. E. 891). The foregoing ruling disposes of the 1st special ground (No. 4) of the motion for a new trial.

2. There was some evidence to authorize the charge on mutual combat, and the excerpts from the charge relating to mutual combat, of which complaint is made in the motion for a new trial, are not erroneous.

3. The verdict has the approval of the judge who tried the case, and is not without evidence to support it, and, as no error of law was committed, this court cannot interfere.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and Luhe, J., concur.

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

Arnold v. State, 114 S.E. 922, 29 Ga. App. 285, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 250 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

114 S.E. 922 (Arnold v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Horton v. State
158 S.E. 629 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1931)