Johnson v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Johnson v. State

158 S.E. 767, 43 Ga. App. 299, 1931 Ga. App. LEXIS 316

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 12, 1931

Docket21271

StatusPublished

This text of 158 S.E. 767 (Johnson 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

Johnson v. State, 158 S.E. 767, 43 Ga. App. 299, 1931 Ga. App. LEXIS 316 (Ga. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

Alvin Johnson was indicted for assault with intent to murder and was convicted of shooting at another. M. E. Pope testified that, without provocation, the defendant shot at him twice with a double-barrel shotgun loaded with small shot, missing him the first shot, but hitting him the second shot with numerous small shot. In his statement at the trial the defendant said that Pope’s dog had been killing Mrs. Johnson’s sheep, and that he (defendant) told Pope that if he did not tie his dog up he (defendant) would have to.kill him; that Pope said: “Well, if you do, there will be killing done;” that the defendant shot the dog, and that when Pope called for his gun and came running down the road with something in his hands that looked like a gun he (defendant) shot Pope with small shot.

The evidence abundantly supports the verdict, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial, containing only the usual general grounds.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, Q. J., and Bloodworlh, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

Alvin Johnson was indicted for assault with intent to murder and was convicted of shooting at another. M. E. Pope testified that, without provocation, the defendant shot at him twice with a double-barrel shotgun loaded with small shot, missing him the first shot, but hitting him the second shot with numerous small shot. In his statement at the trial the defendant said that Pope’s dog had been killing Mrs. Johnson’s sheep, and that he (defendant) told Pope that if he did not tie his dog up he (defendant) would have to.kill him; that Pope said: “Well, if you do, there will be killing done;” that the defendant shot the dog, and that when Pope called for his gun and came running down the road with something in his hands that looked like a gun he (defendant) shot Pope with small shot.

The evidence abundantly supports the verdict, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial, containing only the usual general grounds.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, Q. J., and Bloodworlh, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

158 S.E. 767, 43 Ga. App. 299, 1931 Ga. App. LEXIS 316, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-state-gactapp-1931.