Gilmer v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Gilmer v. State

197 Ga. 849

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJuly 6, 1944

DocketNo. 14888

StatusPublished

This text of 197 Ga. 849 (Gilmer 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

Gilmer v. State, 197 Ga. 849 (Ga. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

Jenkins, Presiding Justice.

The only error assigned in the bill of exceptions is to the judgment overruling the motion for new trial, which was based on the general grounds only, going to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict. The evidence amply supported the verdict, and having been approved by the trial judge, the judgment refusing a. new trial will not be disturbed.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. George Fink, William II. Young Jr., and Battle, Smith & Elliott,. for plaintiff in error. T. Grady Head, attorney-general, Ed Wohlwender Jr., solicitor-general, and Victor Davidson, assistant attorney-general, contra.

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

Jenkins, Presiding Justice.

The only error assigned in the bill of exceptions is to the judgment overruling the motion for new trial, which was based on the general grounds only, going to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict. The evidence amply supported the verdict, and having been approved by the trial judge, the judgment refusing a. new trial will not be disturbed.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. George Fink, William II. Young Jr., and Battle, Smith & Elliott,. for plaintiff in error. T. Grady Head, attorney-general, Ed Wohlwender Jr., solicitor-general, and Victor Davidson, assistant attorney-general, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 Ga. 849, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilmer-v-state-ga-1944.