Fife v. State

116 S.E. 912, 30 Ga. App. 23, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 224
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 6, 1923
Docket14126
StatusPublished

This text of 116 S.E. 912 (Fife 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
Fife v. State, 116 S.E. 912, 30 Ga. App. 23, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 224 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Opinion

Luke, J.

The evidence was wholly circumstantial and did not exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of the defendant’s guilt. The court, therefore, erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, G. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. W. II. Ennis, for plaintiff in error, James Maddox, solicitor, contra,

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
116 S.E. 912, 30 Ga. App. 23, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 224, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fife-v-state-gactapp-1923.