King v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

King v. State

162 S.E. 876, 44 Ga. App. 774, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 495

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 17, 1932

Docket21961

StatusPublished

This text of 162 S.E. 876 (King v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

King v. State, 162 S.E. 876, 44 Ga. App. 774, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 495 (Ga. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

The venue in,this case was not proved by any direct evidence; and the circumstantial evidence, tending to establish that the alleged offense was committed in Chattooga county, Georgia ‘(the county where the indictment charged that the crime was committed), was not sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis than that the offense was committed in that county; and the defendant in his motion for a new trial specifically alleged that the venue was not proved. It follows that the defendant’s conviction was unauthorized, and that the court’s refusal to grant him a new trial was error.

Judgment reversed.

Luke, J., concurs. Bloodworth, J., absent on account of illness.

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

Broyles, C. J.

The venue in,this case was not proved by any direct evidence; and the circumstantial evidence, tending to establish that the alleged offense was committed in Chattooga county, Georgia ‘(the county where the indictment charged that the crime was committed), was not sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis than that the offense was committed in that county; and the defendant in his motion for a new trial specifically alleged that the venue was not proved. It follows that the defendant’s conviction was unauthorized, and that the court’s refusal to grant him a new trial was error.

Judgment reversed.

Luke, J., concurs. Bloodworth, J., absent on account of illness.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

162 S.E. 876, 44 Ga. App. 774, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 495, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-state-gactapp-1932.