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

Hunter v. State

118 S.E. 704, 30 Ga. App. 615, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 560
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Hunter v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 29 Ga. App. 366 →
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided July 10, 1923·No. 14611·Published

Opinion

Broyles, U. J.

The motion for a new trial contained only the usual general grounds; the evidence, direct and circumstantial, was sufficient to authorize the jury to return the verdict rendered, and the court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. W. G. Post, for plaintiff in error. W. Y. Atkinson, solicitor-gen eral, contra.

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

Hunter v. State, 118 S.E. 704, 30 Ga. App. 615, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 560 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

118 S.E. 704 (Hunter v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.