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

Hulin v. State

112 S.E. 294, 28 Ga. App. 562, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 694
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMay 9, 1922
Docket13409
StatusPublished

This text of 112 S.E. 294 (Hulin 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
Hulin v. State, 112 S.E. 294, 28 Ga. App. 562, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 694 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Opinion

Broyles, O. J.

1. After correctly instructing the jury as to the law' in reference to the defendant’s statement, it was not error in that connection to charge: “ remembering that it is not under oath nor subject to the penalties incident to a sworn witness.” Ryals v. State, 125 Ga. 266 (54 S. E. 168), and citation; Harrison v. State, 28 Ga. App. 554 (112 S. E. 293).

2. There is no substantial merit in any of the remaining grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial.

3. The verdict was authorized by the evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. Indictment for carrying pistol; from Wilkes superior court — Judge Shurley. January 24, 1922. F. H. Colley, Hugh E. Combs, F. W. Gilbert, for plaintiff in error. M. L. Felts, solicitor-general, contra.

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

Related

Ryals v. State
54 S.E. 168 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1906)
Harrison v. State
112 S.E. 293 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
112 S.E. 294, 28 Ga. App. 562, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 694, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hulin-v-state-gactapp-1922.