Cody v. State
Opinion
1. Where it is material to explain how or why a search for property was made, it is competent to show that this was done in consequence of information received. But statements conveying such information are not admissible as affirmative proof of the facts contained in them. Lyman v. State, 69 Ga. 404; Stevens v. State, 77 Ga. 310; Foster v. Atlanta Rapid Transit Co., 119 Ga. 675; Collins v. State, 88 Ga. 347.
2. Where the evidence failed to prove the offense charged except by considering statements, not under oath, made by a person since deceased, a verdict of guilty was not supported by the evidence.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
124 Ga. 446 (Cody v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.