Banks v. State

129 S.E. 667, 34 Ga. App. 232, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 179
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJuly 29, 1925
Docket16592
StatusPublished

This text of 129 S.E. 667 (Banks 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
Banks v. State, 129 S.E. 667, 34 Ga. App. 232, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 179 (Ga. Ct. App. 1925).

Opinion

Broyles, 0. J.

The evidence, while wholly circumstantial, was sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of the defendant’s guilt. The overruling of the motion for a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
129 S.E. 667, 34 Ga. App. 232, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 179, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/banks-v-state-gactapp-1925.