Gentry v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Gentry v. State

83 S.E. 1099, 15 Ga. App. 641, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 15

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 20, 1915

Docket6137

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 83 S.E. 1099 (Gentry 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

Gentry v. State, 83 S.E. 1099, 15 Ga. App. 641, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 15 (Ga. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, J.

1. In tlie “practice act,” approved August 21, 1911 (Acts 1911, p. 149), it is declared that “no judgment of a trial court in a criminal case shall be reversed by either the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals for lack of proof of venue, or of the time of the commission of the offense, save where the particular point has been specifically raised by a ground of the original or amended motion for a new trial.” In the present case the particular points, to wit, that there was no proof of venue, or of the time of the commission of the offense, were not raised by any ground of the motion for new trial, and the act cited controls the case on these points. Marshman v. State, 138 Ga. 864 (76 S. E. 572) ; Wall v. State, 10 Ga. App. 136 (72 S. E. 934); Parrish v. State, 10 Ga. App. 836 (74 S. E. 445).

2. There was some evidence to support the verdict, and, no legal error having been committed, the refusal of the trial judge to grant the motion for a new trial will not be reversed. Judgment affirmed.

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

Broyles, J.

1. In tlie “practice act,” approved August 21, 1911 (Acts 1911, p. 149), it is declared that “no judgment of a trial court in a criminal case shall be reversed by either the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals for lack of proof of venue, or of the time of the commission of the offense, save where the particular point has been specifically raised by a ground of the original or amended motion for a new trial.” In the present case the particular points, to wit, that there was no proof of venue, or of the time of the commission of the offense, were not raised by any ground of the motion for new trial, and the act cited controls the case on these points. Marshman v. State, 138 Ga. 864 (76 S. E. 572) ; Wall v. State, 10 Ga. App. 136 (72 S. E. 934); Parrish v. State, 10 Ga. App. 836 (74 S. E. 445).

2. There was some evidence to support the verdict, and, no legal error having been committed, the refusal of the trial judge to grant the motion for a new trial will not be reversed. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 S.E. 1099, 15 Ga. App. 641, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 15, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gentry-v-state-gactapp-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack