Hicks v. State

47 S.E. 547, 120 Ga. 176, 1904 Ga. LEXIS 486
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided May 10, 1904·Published

Opinion

Evans, J.

1. This case was argued by brief. Assignments of error set forth in an amendment to a motion for a new trial, but not insisted on in the brief filed by counsel for the plaintiff in error, will be treated as having been abandoned. Moss v. Bohanon, 111 Ga. 871.

2. There was ample evidence to warrant the verdict; and no error of law appearing, and the finding of the jury having received the approval of the trial judge, the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial is

Affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Hicks v. State, 47 S.E. 547, 120 Ga. 176, 1904 Ga. LEXIS 486 (Ga. 1904).

47 S.E. 547 (Hicks v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Moss v. Bohanon
36 S.E. 954 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1900)