Golding v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Golding v. State

42 S.E. 744, 116 Ga. 526, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 161

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedNovember 12, 1902

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 42 S.E. 744 (Golding 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

Golding v. State, 42 S.E. 744, 116 Ga. 526, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 161 (Ga. 1902).

Pincite

Opinion

Little, J.

1. There was evidence sufficient to authorize a finding by the jury that the accused was guilty of the offense with which he was charged.

2. Thetrial judge committed no errorin refusing to instruct the jury as requested by counsel for the defendant. The question whether the accused intended to steal, as well as that whether he did in fact commit the larceny charged, was fairly submitted in the general charge, which covered the particular matter of intention referred to in the request.

3. The trial judge fairly submitted the issues made by the pleadings and evidence,'and his charge was not calculated to mislead the jury in their finding.

4. The evidence alleged to be newly discovered was immaterial in its character, and was not legally sufficient to change or influence the verdict.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring, except Lumpkin, P. J., absent, ' and Candler, J., not' presiding.

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