Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Hill v. State

Hill v. State

118 S.E. 608, 30 Ga. App. 619, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 566
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Hill v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 28 Ga. App. 459 →
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided July 10, 1923·No. 14664·Published

Opinion

Broyles, O. J.

The testimony of the accomplice was sufficiently corroborated by the other facts and circumstance’s of the case; the verdict was amply authorized by the evidence, and none of the special grounds of the motion for a new trial requires a reversal of the judgment below.

Judgment affirmed.

Luhe and Bloodioorth, JJ., concur. M. B. Eubanks, for plaintiff in error. J. M. Lang, solicitor-general, contra.

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

Hill v. State, 118 S.E. 608, 30 Ga. App. 619, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 566 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

118 S.E. 608 (Hill v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.