Harrison v. State
112 S.E. 293, 28 Ga. App. 554, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 682
Opinion
1. After correctly instructing the jury as to the law in reference to the defendant’s statement, it was not error in that connection to charge: “ remembering that he is not under oath nor subject to the penalties incident to a sworn witness.” Ryals v. State, 125 Ga. 266 (54 S. E. 168), and citation. See also Norman v. State, 28 Ga. App. 561 (112 S. E. 293).
2. The verdict was amply authorized by the evidence, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.
■Judgment affirmed,
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Harrison v. State, 112 S.E. 293, 28 Ga. App. 554, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 682 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).
112 S.E. 293 (Harrison v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Henderson v. State
176 S.E. 811 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1934)
Stokes v. State
112 S.E. 293 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1922)
Hulin v. State
112 S.E. 294 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1922)