Jenkins v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Jenkins v. State

131 S.E. 112, 34 Ga. App. 688, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 494

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 15, 1925

Docket16863

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 131 S.E. 112 (Jenkins 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

Jenkins v. State, 131 S.E. 112, 34 Ga. App. 688, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 494 (Ga. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, O. J.

1. The defendant was convicted of an assault with intent to murder. Upon the trial evidence was adduced which would hav,e authorized the jury to find that there was a mutual intent to fight on the part of the defendant and the person alleged to have been assaulted by him, and that mutual blows were exchanged. Therefore, the court, even without, a written request, should have charged the jury, upon the law of mutual combat and of voluntary manslaughter, and the failure to do so requii’es another tx'ial of the case. Tucker v. State, ante, 670.

[689]*689Decided December 15, 1925. Norman & Norman, H. B. Combs, for plaintiff in error. M. L. Felts, solicitor-general, contra.

2. The assignments of error not dealt with above are without merit.

Judgment reversed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, O. J.

1. The defendant was convicted of an assault with intent to murder. Upon the trial evidence was adduced which would hav,e authorized the jury to find that there was a mutual intent to fight on the part of the defendant and the person alleged to have been assaulted by him, and that mutual blows were exchanged. Therefore, the court, even without, a written request, should have charged the jury, upon the law of mutual combat and of voluntary manslaughter, and the failure to do so requii’es another tx'ial of the case. Tucker v. State, ante, 670.

[689]*689Decided December 15, 1925. Norman & Norman, H. B. Combs, for plaintiff in error. M. L. Felts, solicitor-general, contra.

2. The assignments of error not dealt with above are without merit.

Judgment reversed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

131 S.E. 112, 34 Ga. App. 688, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 494, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jenkins-v-state-gactapp-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack