Dial v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Dial v. State

117 S.E. 775, 30 Ga. App. 265, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 387

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 15, 1923

Docket14349

StatusPublished

This text of 117 S.E. 775 (Dial 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

Dial v. State, 117 S.E. 775, 30 Ga. App. 265, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 387 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

The defendant was accused and convicted of the offense of malicious mischief. The sole assignment of error is that the evidence does not authorize the verdict. This court cannot say that there was no evidence to authorize the verdict. The trial judge having approved the verdict, it was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Blood-worth, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

The defendant was accused and convicted of the offense of malicious mischief. The sole assignment of error is that the evidence does not authorize the verdict. This court cannot say that there was no evidence to authorize the verdict. The trial judge having approved the verdict, it was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Blood-worth, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 S.E. 775, 30 Ga. App. 265, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 387, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dial-v-state-gactapp-1923.