Hayden v. State
69 Ga. 731
Opinion
[It is necessary to state only the following, in connection with the above syllabus : “The court was requested to give in charge, a hypothesis based upon the statement of the prisoner. This he declined to do, on the ground that there was no evidence upon which' to base such charge ; but charged that the jury “should not discredit the sworn testimony in the case entirely, in order to believe the statement in preference thereto.”]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hayden v. State, 69 Ga. 731 (Ga. 1882).
69 Ga. 731 (Hayden v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Wallace v. State
371 S.E.2d 914 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1988)
Gearin v. State
195 S.E.2d 211 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1973)
Wilson v. State
183 S.E.2d 926 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1971)
Morman v. Pritchard
132 S.E.2d 561 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1963)
Wood v. State
92 S.E.2d 118 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1956)
Drewry v. State
65 S.E.2d 916 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1951)
Beard v. State
32 S.E.2d 121 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1944)
Owens v. Watkins
5 S.E.2d 905 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Porter v. State
178 S.E. 151 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1935)
Watson v. State
164 S.E. 482 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1932)
Marsh v. State
161 S.E. 817 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)
Hunt v. State
144 S.E. 148 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1928)
Young v. Broyles
85 S.E. 366 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1915)
Moore v. City of Winder
73 S.E. 529 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1912)
Callaway v. City of Atlanta
64 S.E. 1105 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1909)
Clements v. McCormick Harvesting Machine Co.
42 S.E. 222 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1902)
Hardin v. State
33 S.E. 700 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1899)
Archie v. State
25 S.E. 612 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1896)
Underwood v. State
13 S.E. 856 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1891)
Maxwell v. Tumlin
4 S.E. 858 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1887)