Banks v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Banks v. State

78 S.E. 1014, 13 Ga. App. 182, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 96

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided August 12, 1913·No. 5046·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

'Russell, J.

1. The judge of the superior court did not err in refusing to sanction the certiorari.

2. The evidence as to the identity of the accused was sufficient to authorize the jury to find that he was the person who sold the intoxicating liquors, although a large number of witnesses testified that another and not he was the seller. Watson v. State, ante, 181 (78 S. E. 1014).

3. The testimony as to the identity of the accused was positive and direct; and hence the trial judge did not err in omitting to charge the jury on the law applicable to their consideration of circumstantial evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

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

'Russell, J.

1. The judge of the superior court did not err in refusing to sanction the certiorari.

2. The evidence as to the identity of the accused was sufficient to authorize the jury to find that he was the person who sold the intoxicating liquors, although a large number of witnesses testified that another and not he was the seller. Watson v. State, ante, 181 (78 S. E. 1014).

3. The testimony as to the identity of the accused was positive and direct; and hence the trial judge did not err in omitting to charge the jury on the law applicable to their consideration of circumstantial evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

Banks v. State, 78 S.E. 1014, 13 Ga. App. 182, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 96 (Ga. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

78 S.E. 1014 (Banks v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related