Duke v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Duke v. State

120 S.E. 559, 31 Ga. App. 308, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 916

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 5, 1923

Docket15044

StatusPublished

This text of 120 S.E. 559 (Duke 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

Duke v. State, 120 S.E. 559, 31 Ga. App. 308, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 916 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

The defendant’s contention that he was convicted upon the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice is without merit. The testimony of the accomplice was corroborated by evidence which tended directly to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense. The defendant has had a legal trial, the verdict has been approved [309]*309by the trial court, and for no reason pointed out was it error to overrule his motion for a new trial.

Decided December 5, 1923. J. A. Darsey, for plaintiff in error. E. M. Owen, solicitor-general, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

The defendant’s contention that he was convicted upon the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice is without merit. The testimony of the accomplice was corroborated by evidence which tended directly to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense. The defendant has had a legal trial, the verdict has been approved [309]*309by the trial court, and for no reason pointed out was it error to overrule his motion for a new trial.

Decided December 5, 1923. J. A. Darsey, for plaintiff in error. E. M. Owen, solicitor-general, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

120 S.E. 559, 31 Ga. App. 308, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 916, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/duke-v-state-gactapp-1923.