Clay v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Clay v. State

22 S.E.2d 325, 68 Ga. App. 206, 1942 Ga. App. LEXIS 89

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 3, 1942

Docket29709.

StatusPublished

This text of 22 S.E.2d 325 (Clay 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

Clay v. State, 22 S.E.2d 325, 68 Ga. App. 206, 1942 Ga. App. LEXIS 89 (Ga. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

The accused was convicted, in the criminal court of Fulton County, of the offense of cheating and swindling. The evidence, while in sharp conflict, authorized the verdict. The assignment of error, in the petition for certiorari, on the refusal of the court to give *207 a certain requested charge to the jury, can not be considered by this court, since the trial judge in his untráversed answer to the petition certifies that there was no written request for the charge. The overruling of the certiorari was not error.

Decided October 3, 1942. Rehearing denied October 20, 1942. G. G. Battle, G. Don Miller, for plaintiff in error. Bond Almand, solicitor, John A. Boylcin, solicitor-general, Durwood T. Pye, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Gardner, JJ., ooncwr.

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

Broyles, C. J.

The accused was convicted, in the criminal court of Fulton County, of the offense of cheating and swindling. The evidence, while in sharp conflict, authorized the verdict. The assignment of error, in the petition for certiorari, on the refusal of the court to give *207 a certain requested charge to the jury, can not be considered by this court, since the trial judge in his untráversed answer to the petition certifies that there was no written request for the charge. The overruling of the certiorari was not error.

Decided October 3, 1942. Rehearing denied October 20, 1942. G. G. Battle, G. Don Miller, for plaintiff in error. Bond Almand, solicitor, John A. Boylcin, solicitor-general, Durwood T. Pye, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Gardner, JJ., ooncwr.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 S.E.2d 325, 68 Ga. App. 206, 1942 Ga. App. LEXIS 89, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clay-v-state-gactapp-1942.