Herndon v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Herndon v. State

35 S.E. 154, 110 Ga. 313, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 402

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 27, 1900

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 35 S.E. 154 (Herndon v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Herndon v. State, 35 S.E. 154, 110 Ga. 313, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 402 (Ga. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Cobb, J.

1. Where several persons are jointly tried and convicted of a criminal offense involving moral turpitude, and all unite in a motion for a new trial, there is no merit in an amendment thereto, unsup- ,. ported by affidavits as to character, made in behalf of all of the movants save one, alleging that “ since the trial of said case they have learned that they can prove by the testimony of ” their codefendant that they had nothing whatever to do with the commission of the crime. Even if such testimony could in a particular instance be regarded as newly discovered evidence, there would be no abuse of discretion in disregarding it, the witness being a convicted criminal whom the judge might readily disbelieve, and whose character was not vouched for.

2. Tested by established legal rules, the evidence, though not of the ' strongest and most satisfactory character, was sufficient to warrant the verdict, and, the same having been approved by the trial judge, this court would not be justified in setting it aside.

Judgment affirmed,.

All the Justices concurring:

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

Cobb, J.

1. Where several persons are jointly tried and convicted of a criminal offense involving moral turpitude, and all unite in a motion for a new trial, there is no merit in an amendment thereto, unsup- ,. ported by affidavits as to character, made in behalf of all of the movants save one, alleging that “ since the trial of said case they have learned that they can prove by the testimony of ” their codefendant that they had nothing whatever to do with the commission of the crime. Even if such testimony could in a particular instance be regarded as newly discovered evidence, there would be no abuse of discretion in disregarding it, the witness being a convicted criminal whom the judge might readily disbelieve, and whose character was not vouched for.

2. Tested by established legal rules, the evidence, though not of the ' strongest and most satisfactory character, was sufficient to warrant the verdict, and, the same having been approved by the trial judge, this court would not be justified in setting it aside.

Judgment affirmed,.

All the Justices concurring:

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

35 S.E. 154, 110 Ga. 313, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 402, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/herndon-v-state-ga-1900.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack