Jordan v. State
This text of 52 S.E. 768 (Jordan v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. This ease is controlled by the decision in Ciarlo v. State, 117 Ga. 254, which follows the rule laid down in many other former adjudications, and has also been followed by others. See Felton v. State, 56 Ga. 84; Brown v. State, 60 Ga. 210; O’Kelly v. Felker, 71 Ga. 775; Lasseter v. Simpson, 78 Ga. 61; Munro v. Moody, Id. 127; Davis v. Bagley, 99 Ga. 142; Hardy v. State, 117 Ga. 40. Upon review of the eases this court Is satisfied that they were-properly decided, and all are reaffirmed.
2. These decisions hold, in effect, that evidence that one of the State’s witnesses, since the trial, has made declarations, even though under oath, that his testimony given upon the trial was false, is not cause for a new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
52 S.E. 768, 124 Ga. 417, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 729, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jordan-v-state-ga-1905.