Jones v. State

117 S.E. 827, 30 Ga. App. 361, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 458
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Jones v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 26 Ga. App. 635
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided June 12, 1923·No. 14485·Published

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. When on the trial of an indictment containing two counts the court instructs the jury not to consider one of the counts for the reason that the evidence does not authorize a conviction under it, a general verdict of guilty is properly treated as having been based on the count submitted to the jury. See Waver v. State, 108 Ga. 775 (33 S. E. 423).

[362]*362Decided June 12, 1923. B. B. Benitz, W. A. McClellan, for plaintiff in error. ■ Boy W.. Moore, solicitor, contra.

2. The evidence in this case authorized the defendant’s conviction, and it was not error .to overrule the motion for a new trial.

■Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, -0. J., and Bloodicorth, J., concur.

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

Jones v. State, 117 S.E. 827, 30 Ga. App. 361, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 458 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

117 S.E. 827 (Jones v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Waver v. State
33 S.E. 423 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1899)