Fouts v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Fouts v. State

137 S.E. 864, 36 Ga. App. 678, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 247

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 13, 1927

Docket17890

StatusPublished

This text of 137 S.E. 864 (Fouts 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

Fouts v. State, 137 S.E. 864, 36 Ga. App. 678, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 247 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Bkoyles, C. J.

The venue of the offense charged was sufficiently proved; the verdict was authorized by the evidence, and none of the special grounds of the motion for a new trial require another hearing of the case. Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., coneur. J. H. Paschall, J. M. Lang, for plaintiff in error. C. C. Pittman, solicitor-general, J. C. Mitchell, solicitor-general, contra.

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

Bkoyles, C. J.

The venue of the offense charged was sufficiently proved; the verdict was authorized by the evidence, and none of the special grounds of the motion for a new trial require another hearing of the case. Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., coneur. J. H. Paschall, J. M. Lang, for plaintiff in error. C. C. Pittman, solicitor-general, J. C. Mitchell, solicitor-general, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 S.E. 864, 36 Ga. App. 678, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fouts-v-state-gactapp-1927.