Fordham v. State

37 S.E. 391, 112 Ga. 228, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 107
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedNovember 27, 1900
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 37 S.E. 391 (Fordham v. State) 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
Fordham v. State, 37 S.E. 391, 112 Ga. 228, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 107 (Ga. 1900).

Opinion

Lewis, J.

1. Alleged error in refusing to admit evidence can not be considered,, when it does not appear what the rejected evidence was.

2. The charge relating to the grades of homicide in this case was neither erroneous nor calculated to exclude from consideration the question whether or not the corpus delicti had been proved.

3. When a jury request further instructions, it will be presumed, unless the contrary affirmatively appears, that the judge in recharging covered the inquiries submitted by them, and it is not necessary in so doing for him to repeat what he has already charged as to other matters.

4. It does not, in the present case, appear that the judge failed to cover all the points submitted by the jury in asking for a recharge.

5. Exceptions to a charge must point out the portion or portions thereof to which, they relate.

6. The corpus delicti in this case was sufficiently proved; the evidence warranted the conviction of the plaintiff in error; and the newly discovered evidence [229]*229was either merely cumulative or impeaching in character. There was no error in denying a new trial, and no new question of law is presented.

Argued November 19, Decided November 27, 1900. Indictment for murder. Before Judge Hart. Laurens superior court. September 17, 1900. Howard & Armistead and John R. Cooper, for plaintiff in error. J. M. Terrell, attorney-general, and H. G. Lewis, solicitor-general, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.

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

Related

Hysler v. State
95 So. 573 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
37 S.E. 391, 112 Ga. 228, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fordham-v-state-ga-1900.