Brown v. State
This text of 121 S.E. 130 (Brown 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.
Opinion
1. In the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error there is no general insistence on all the grounds of the motion for a new trial, and as the special grounds of the motion are not referred to in the brief, they will be treated as abandoned.
2. On the trial the evidence of the accomplice as to the guilt of the accused was direct and authorized his conviction. While the evidence of an accomplice must be corroborated, the extent of the corroboration is a question entirely for the jury. In this case there was some corrob- ' orating testimony, and this court will not say that the evidence did not authorize the verdict.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
121 S.E. 130, 31 Ga. App. 547, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-state-gactapp-1924.