Huff v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Huff v. State

97 S.E. 200, 22 Ga. App. 788, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 755

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 1, 1918

Docket9988

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 97 S.E. 200 (Huff 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

Huff v. State, 97 S.E. 200, 22 Ga. App. 788, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 755 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, P. J.

1. It does not appear that the trial judge abused his discretion in overruling the motion for a continuance based upon the absence of certain witnesses who did 'not reside in the county where the case was pending.

2.' The verdict was authorized by the evidence, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed..

Bloodworth and Harwell, JJ., concu/r. W. A. Dampier, for plaintiff in error. W. A. Wooten, solicitor-general, contra.

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