Hall v. State
165 S.E. 466, 45 Ga. App. 519, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 590
Opinion
1. The venue of the offense was sufficiently proved.
2. The verdict was demanded by the evidence and the statement of the defendant to the jury, and, therefore, any error in the charge of the court was harmless. Accordingly, the ground of the motion for a new trial, alleging error in an excerpt from the charge, will not be passed upon. The refusal to grant a new trial was not error.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hall v. State, 165 S.E. 466, 45 Ga. App. 519, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 590 (Ga. Ct. App. 1932).
165 S.E. 466 (Hall v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Cauley v. State
203 S.E.2d 239 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1973)
Pennington v. State
161 S.E.2d 327 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1968)
Fanning v. State
169 S.E. 60 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1933)