Brant v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Brant v. State

208 S.E.2d 636, 132 Ga. App. 631, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1774

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 20, 1974

Docket49649

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 208 S.E.2d 636 (Brant 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

Brant v. State, 208 S.E.2d 636, 132 Ga. App. 631, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1774 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Eberhardt, Presiding Judge.

L. C. Brant was convicted of the offense of burglary and he appeals, enumerating as error the overruling of his motion for new trial on the general grounds. Held:

1. A careful reading of the record discloses that there was ample evidence, though circumstantial, to authorize the verdict. The general grounds are without merit.

2. That the state relied upon circumstantial evidence in procuring the conviction does not require a different result. There was a full and ample charge on the matter of circumstantial evidence, and it became a jury issue as to whether the evidence was sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of guilt. Fraser v. State, 55 Ga. 325 (6). This issue was resolved against the defendant, as the jury was authorized under the evidence to do. We find no error of law.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen and Stolz, JJ, concur.

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