Barclay v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Barclay v. State

197 Ga. 143

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided November 30, 1943·No. No. 14728·Published

Opinion

Wyatt, Justice.

The motion for new trial contains the general grounds only. The evidence, although entirely circumstantial, was sufficient nevertheless to authorize the verdict, and the court did not err in refusing a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. Carlyle Giles, for plaintiffs in error. T. Grady Head, attorney-general, C. S. Baldwin Jr., solicitor-general, and L. C. Groves, assistant attorney-general, contra.

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

Wyatt, Justice.

The motion for new trial contains the general grounds only. The evidence, although entirely circumstantial, was sufficient nevertheless to authorize the verdict, and the court did not err in refusing a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. Carlyle Giles, for plaintiffs in error. T. Grady Head, attorney-general, C. S. Baldwin Jr., solicitor-general, and L. C. Groves, assistant attorney-general, contra.

Barclay v. State, 197 Ga. 143 (Ga. 1943).

Pincite

197 Ga. 143 (Barclay v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.