Gilmer v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Gilmer v. State

197 Ga. 849

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided July 6, 1944·No. No. 14888·Published

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.

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

Pincite

197 Ga. 849 (Gilmer v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.