Jones v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Jones v. State

116 S.E. 548, 30 Ga. App. 13, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 216

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided March 6, 1923·No. 14072·Published

Opinion

Luke, J.

The sole assignment of error is upon the ground that the evidence did not authorize the defendant’s conviction. Upon conflicting evidence the jury were authorized to return the verdict of guilty. The verdict having the approval of the trial judge, this court cannot say that it was error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. Len K. Roan, for plaintiff in error. John A. Boykin, solicitor-general, B. A. Stephens, contra.

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

Luke, J.

The sole assignment of error is upon the ground that the evidence did not authorize the defendant’s conviction. Upon conflicting evidence the jury were authorized to return the verdict of guilty. The verdict having the approval of the trial judge, this court cannot say that it was error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. Len K. Roan, for plaintiff in error. John A. Boykin, solicitor-general, B. A. Stephens, contra.

Jones v. State, 116 S.E. 548, 30 Ga. App. 13, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 216 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

116 S.E. 548 (Jones v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.