Hester v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hester v. State

170 S.E. 301, 47 Ga. App. 226, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 353

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 21, 1933

Docket22569

StatusPublished

This text of 170 S.E. 301 (Hester 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

Hester v. State, 170 S.E. 301, 47 Ga. App. 226, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 353 (Ga. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Guerry, J.

1. The general grounds of the motion for a new trial are not argued or insisted upon in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, and therefore are treated as abandoned.

2. The sole special ground of the motion is based upon the failure of the judge, in the absence of a written request, to charge the law of circumstantial evidence. The evidence was not wholly circumstantial, and, therefore, the failure so to charge was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

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

Guerry, J.

1. The general grounds of the motion for a new trial are not argued or insisted upon in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, and therefore are treated as abandoned.

2. The sole special ground of the motion is based upon the failure of the judge, in the absence of a written request, to charge the law of circumstantial evidence. The evidence was not wholly circumstantial, and, therefore, the failure so to charge was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 S.E. 301, 47 Ga. App. 226, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hester-v-state-gactapp-1933.