Jones v. State

114 S.E. 916, 29 Ga. App. 286, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 253

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

The evidence, while circumstantial, was sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of the defendant’s guilt; and, the special grounds of the motion for a new trial not being argued or insisted upon in the brief of counsel for plaintiff in error, the judgment of the lower court refusing a new trial is

Affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Lulce, J., concur.