King v. State
This text of 158 S.E. 2 (King 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.
Opinions
The defendant made an extraordinary motion for new trial. The judge declined to entertain the motion, and the defendant presented a bill of exceptions. The judge refused to certify the same, and the defendant applied to this court for a mandamus to require the judge below to do so, which this court granted. In his answer the judge based h'is refusal to certify upon the ground that the bill of exceptions was presented to him in vacation and not in term time. Upon the hearing of the mandamus this court held that this contention was not well founded, and that the bill of exceptions was presented to the judge in term time. Thereupon this court made the mandamus absolute. Thereafter the judge certified the bill of exceptions. In this stage of the ease the only thing to be considered and decided by this court is whether the judge erred in declining to entertain the extraordinary motion for new trial. By the grant of the mandamus this court held that there was enough in the motion to require the judge to entertain it. This court is of the opinion that the newly discovered evidence would authorize the grant of a new trial, and that the action of the judge in declining to entertain the extraordinary motion for new trial can not be sustained upon the ground that it was without merit. So we remand the case with direction that the judge consider and pass upon the motion.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
158 S.E. 2, 172 Ga. 508, 1931 Ga. LEXIS 133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-state-ga-1931.