Glover v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Glover v. State

107 S.E. 263, 26 Ga. App. 676, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 590

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 14, 1921

Docket12133

StatusPublished

This text of 107 S.E. 263 (Glover 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

Glover v. State, 107 S.E. 263, 26 Ga. App. 676, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 590 (Ga. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

While there is no substantial merit in the special grounds of the motion for a new trial, the circumstances in this case relied upon by the State to corroborate the testimony of the accomplice, as to the defendant’s participation in the burglary, were insufficient to warrant a verdict of guilty; and therefore the judgment denying a new trial must be reversed.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. John B. Cooper, W. O. Cooper Jr., for plaintiff in error. Charles H. Garrett, solicitor-general, contra.

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

Luke, J.

While there is no substantial merit in the special grounds of the motion for a new trial, the circumstances in this case relied upon by the State to corroborate the testimony of the accomplice, as to the defendant’s participation in the burglary, were insufficient to warrant a verdict of guilty; and therefore the judgment denying a new trial must be reversed.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. John B. Cooper, W. O. Cooper Jr., for plaintiff in error. Charles H. Garrett, solicitor-general, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

107 S.E. 263, 26 Ga. App. 676, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 590, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glover-v-state-gactapp-1921.