Buttrum v. State
174 S.E. 214, 49 Ga. App. 79, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 265
Opinion
The defendant was convicted of possessing whisky. The evidence tending to connect her with that offense was wholly circumstantial and was insufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of her guilt. Furthermore, the uncontradicted testimony of an un-‘ impeached witness for the defense strongly tended to establish her innocence. It follows that the refusal to grant her a new trial was error.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Buttrum v. State, 174 S.E. 214, 49 Ga. App. 79, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 265 (Ga. Ct. App. 1934).
174 S.E. 214 (Buttrum v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hill v. State
177 S.E. 826 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1934)