Chapman v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Chapman v. State

18 S.E.2d 502, 66 Ga. App. 552, 1942 Ga. App. LEXIS 221

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 21, 1942

Docket29345.

StatusPublished

This text of 18 S.E.2d 502 (Chapman 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

Chapman v. State, 18 S.E.2d 502, 66 Ga. App. 552, 1942 Ga. App. LEXIS 221 (Ga. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

Leonard Chapman was convicted of the offense of unlawfully shooting at another, and his motion for new trial was overruled. The verdict was authorized by the evidence. A special ground of the motion complains of the admission of certain orkl evidence, but the name of the witness so testifying is not stated therein; and therefore this court can not pass upon the assignment of error. Hunter v. State, 148 Ga. 566 (97 S. E. 523); Plemmons v. Sharp, 156 Ga. 571 (3) (119 S. E. 532). The other special assignment of error is not argued or insisted on in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, and therefore, it is treated as *553 abandoned. The refusal of the court to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Gardner, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

Leonard Chapman was convicted of the offense of unlawfully shooting at another, and his motion for new trial was overruled. The verdict was authorized by the evidence. A special ground of the motion complains of the admission of certain orkl evidence, but the name of the witness so testifying is not stated therein; and therefore this court can not pass upon the assignment of error. Hunter v. State, 148 Ga. 566 (97 S. E. 523); Plemmons v. Sharp, 156 Ga. 571 (3) (119 S. E. 532). The other special assignment of error is not argued or insisted on in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, and therefore, it is treated as *553 abandoned. The refusal of the court to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Gardner, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 S.E.2d 502, 66 Ga. App. 552, 1942 Ga. App. LEXIS 221, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chapman-v-state-gactapp-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack