Hall v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hall v. State

161 S.E.2d 374, 117 Ga. App. 649, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 1184

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 4, 1968

Docket43439

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 161 S.E.2d 374 (Hall 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

Hall v. State, 161 S.E.2d 374, 117 Ga. App. 649, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 1184 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Pannell, Judge.

1. The brief filed by the appellant in this case, except as to the general grounds of the motion for new trial, does not meet the requirements of Rule 17 (a) (1) and Rule 17 (c) (3) (A) and Rule 17 (c) (3) (B) of this court adopted by it on July 21, 1965, and effective August 1, 1965, in that there is no citation or reference to the record or transcript. Accordingly, under the decisions of the court in Strickland v. English, 115 Ga. App. 384 (2) (154 SE2d 710) and Crider v. State of Ga., 115 Ga. App. 347 (1) (154 SE2d 743), the enumerations of error for which there is no reference made in either the enumeration or the brief will be considered as abandoned.

2. There was sufficient evidence to corroborate the testimony of the accomplices that the defendant here participated in the burglary for which he was charged and convicted.

Judgment affirmed.

Jordan, P. J., and Deen, J., concur.

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

Pannell, Judge.

1. The brief filed by the appellant in this case, except as to the general grounds of the motion for new trial, does not meet the requirements of Rule 17 (a) (1) and Rule 17 (c) (3) (A) and Rule 17 (c) (3) (B) of this court adopted by it on July 21, 1965, and effective August 1, 1965, in that there is no citation or reference to the record or transcript. Accordingly, under the decisions of the court in Strickland v. English, 115 Ga. App. 384 (2) (154 SE2d 710) and Crider v. State of Ga., 115 Ga. App. 347 (1) (154 SE2d 743), the enumerations of error for which there is no reference made in either the enumeration or the brief will be considered as abandoned.

2. There was sufficient evidence to corroborate the testimony of the accomplices that the defendant here participated in the burglary for which he was charged and convicted.

Judgment affirmed.

Jordan, P. J., and Deen, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

161 S.E.2d 374, 117 Ga. App. 649, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 1184, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hall-v-state-gactapp-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack