Fickling v. Meldrim

148 S.E. 100, 168 Ga. 378, 1929 Ga. LEXIS 146
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedApril 10, 1929
DocketNo. 7137
StatusPublished

This text of 148 S.E. 100 (Fickling v. Meldrim) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Fickling v. Meldrim, 148 S.E. 100, 168 Ga. 378, 1929 Ga. LEXIS 146 (Ga. 1929).

Opinions

Atkinson, J.

Where a defendant, after conviction of murder, makes a second motion for new trial upon extraordinary grounds based on alleged newly discovered evidence, and service of such motion is duly acknowledged by counsel for the State, and the motion for new trial is thereafter overruled,, and a bill of exceptions complaining of the judgment overruling the motion for new trial is duly presented to the judge and certified to be true, but the judge refuses to grant a supersedeas to prevent execution of the defendant until after the case has been disposed of by the Supreme Court, this court will grant a writ of mandamus, upon application of the defendant, requiring the judge to grant a supersedeas as above indicated. And it is so ordered in this case.

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

Related

Cribb v. Parker
46 S.E. 110 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1903)
Harris v. Roan
46 S.E. 433 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
148 S.E. 100, 168 Ga. 378, 1929 Ga. LEXIS 146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fickling-v-meldrim-ga-1929.