Cannon v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Cannon v. State

111 S.E. 676, 28 Ga. App. 439, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 580

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 11, 1922

Docket13270

StatusPublished

This text of 111 S.E. 676 (Cannon 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

Cannon v. State, 111 S.E. 676, 28 Ga. App. 439, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 580 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

1. The alleged newly discovered evidence is merely cumulative and impeaching, and its only effect would be to impeach the witnesses for the State; and it is settled by a number of decisions of this court that, even “ though the witness sought to be impeached by newly discovered evidence was the only witness against the prisoner upon a vital point in the ease, if the sole effect of the evidence would be to impeach the witness a new trial will not be granted.” Key v. State, 21 Ga. App. 795 (1) (95 S. E. 269), and citations.

2. The verdict is not without evidence to support it, and the trial judge having exercised the discretion which the law vests in him alone on motions for new trial where there is a conflict in the evidence, by declining to grant a new trial, this court must of necessity hold that there is no merit in the general grounds of the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Bloodworth, J.

1. The alleged newly discovered evidence is merely cumulative and impeaching, and its only effect would be to impeach the witnesses for the State; and it is settled by a number of decisions of this court that, even “ though the witness sought to be impeached by newly discovered evidence was the only witness against the prisoner upon a vital point in the ease, if the sole effect of the evidence would be to impeach the witness a new trial will not be granted.” Key v. State, 21 Ga. App. 795 (1) (95 S. E. 269), and citations.

2. The verdict is not without evidence to support it, and the trial judge having exercised the discretion which the law vests in him alone on motions for new trial where there is a conflict in the evidence, by declining to grant a new trial, this court must of necessity hold that there is no merit in the general grounds of the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 S.E. 676, 28 Ga. App. 439, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 580, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cannon-v-state-gactapp-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack