Cohran v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Cohran v. State

142 S.E. 703, 38 Ga. App. 129, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 83

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 10, 1928

Docket18754

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 142 S.E. 703 (Cohran 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

Cohran v. State, 142 S.E. 703, 38 Ga. App. 129, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 83 (Ga. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

1. The undisputed evidence for the State showed that a gallon and a half of whisky was found in the defendant’s residence and in a room occupied by his mother. The evidence for the defendant and his statement to the jury amply authorized them to find that the whisky was kept there by his mother with his knowledge and consent, and the circumstances were sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis but that of his guilt. That part of the defendant’s statement to the jury in which he declared that he had no control over the room occupied by his mother was contrary to the evidence in the case (the house being his and he being the head of the family), and was evidently disbelieved by the jury.

2. The special grounds of the motion for a new trial are without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. 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 undisputed evidence for the State showed that a gallon and a half of whisky was found in the defendant’s residence and in a room occupied by his mother. The evidence for the defendant and his statement to the jury amply authorized them to find that the whisky was kept there by his mother with his knowledge and consent, and the circumstances were sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis but that of his guilt. That part of the defendant’s statement to the jury in which he declared that he had no control over the room occupied by his mother was contrary to the evidence in the case (the house being his and he being the head of the family), and was evidently disbelieved by the jury.

2. The special grounds of the motion for a new trial are without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

142 S.E. 703, 38 Ga. App. 129, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 83, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohran-v-state-gactapp-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack