Cordell v. State

111 S.E. 701, 28 Ga. App. 472, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 617
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided April 11, 1922·No. 13315·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. A ground of the amendment to the motion for a new trial complains that the court propounded a certain question to a witness and permitted the witness to answer it. However, it is stated in this ground that no objection was made to the admission of this testimony. The ground therefore raises no question for the consideration of this court.

2. The alleged newly discovered evidence is merely cumulative and impeaching in its character, and the court did not err in overruling the special ground of the motion for a new trial based thereon.

3. The verdict was authorized by the evidence, and it was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Cordell v. State, 111 S.E. 701, 28 Ga. App. 472, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 617 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

111 S.E. 701 (Cordell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Parker v. State
112 S.E. 908 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1922)