Henderson v. State

136 S.E. 333, 36 Ga. App. 303, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 38
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided January 11, 1927·No. 17764·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. “Cumulative evidence to prove an alibi, even if newly discovered, is not cause for a new trial.” Harrison v. State, 83 Ga. 129 (9 S. E. 542); Tipton v. State, 119 Ga. 305 (46 S. E. 436); Hanson v. State, 27 Ga. App. 590 (2) (109 S. E. 523).

(a) Furthermore, in the instant case the affidavits in support of the “newly discovered” witnesses were defective, in that they failed to give the names of their associates. The trial judge, therefore, did not abuse his discretion in refusing to grant a new trial on account of the alleged newly discovered evidence. Ivey v. State, 154 Ga. 63 (6) (113 S. E. 175); Waller v. State, 34 Ga. App. 674 (131 S. E. 95).

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and, the finding of the jury having been approved by the trial court, and no error of law appearing, this court is without authority to interfere.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., concurs. Bloodworth, J., absent on account of illness.

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

Henderson v. State, 136 S.E. 333, 36 Ga. App. 303, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 38 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).

136 S.E. 333 (Henderson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gates v. State
66 S.E.2d 342 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1951)
Bryan v. Moncrief Furnace Co.
149 S.E. 193 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1929)