Golden v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Golden v. State

177 S.E. 511, 179 Ga. 767, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 400

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedNovember 17, 1934

DocketNo. 10381

StatusPublished

This text of 177 S.E. 511 (Golden 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

Golden v. State, 177 S.E. 511, 179 Ga. 767, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 400 (Ga. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The evidence, though circumstantial, was sufficient to support the verdict. There is no merit in the special grounds of the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices cononr, except Russell, G. J., and Sutcheson, J., who dissent. '■ M. J. Yeomans, allorney-general, W. O. Forehand, solicitor-geneneral, B. D. Murphy and J. T. Goree, assistant attorneys-general, Philip Newbern, and Levy Rogers, contra.

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

Per Curiam.

The evidence, though circumstantial, was sufficient to support the verdict. There is no merit in the special grounds of the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices cononr, except Russell, G. J., and Sutcheson, J., who dissent. '■ M. J. Yeomans, allorney-general, W. O. Forehand, solicitor-geneneral, B. D. Murphy and J. T. Goree, assistant attorneys-general, Philip Newbern, and Levy Rogers, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

177 S.E. 511, 179 Ga. 767, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 400, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/golden-v-state-ga-1934.