Jenkins v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Jenkins v. State

102 S.E. 830, 150 Ga. 111, 1920 Ga. LEXIS 65

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 14, 1920

DocketNo. 1694

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 102 S.E. 830 (Jenkins v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jenkins v. State, 102 S.E. 830, 150 Ga. 111, 1920 Ga. LEXIS 65 (Ga. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, J.

1. A ground of the motion for new trial which complains that “ the court failed to charge the law and [of] manslaughter ” is not a good assignment of error, and can not be considered by the Supreme Court. Each assignment must be complete within itself. If manslaughter should have been charged, it is necessary that the ground of the motion for new trial complaining of the refusal to so charge should state what grade of manslaughter, whether voluntary or involuntary. Knight v. State, 148 Ga. 40 (3), 41 (95 S. E. 679).

2. Other assignments of error, where sufficient to raise a question for determination by the court, are without merit.

3. The verdict is supported by evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Gilbert, J., absent for providential cause.

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

Hill, J.

1. A ground of the motion for new trial which complains that “ the court failed to charge the law and [of] manslaughter ” is not a good assignment of error, and can not be considered by the Supreme Court. Each assignment must be complete within itself. If manslaughter should have been charged, it is necessary that the ground of the motion for new trial complaining of the refusal to so charge should state what grade of manslaughter, whether voluntary or involuntary. Knight v. State, 148 Ga. 40 (3), 41 (95 S. E. 679).

2. Other assignments of error, where sufficient to raise a question for determination by the court, are without merit.

3. The verdict is supported by evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Gilbert, J., absent for providential cause.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

102 S.E. 830, 150 Ga. 111, 1920 Ga. LEXIS 65, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jenkins-v-state-ga-1920.

Opinion

3. The verdict is supported by evidence.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack