Kolman v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Kolman v. State

52 S.E. 82, 124 Ga. 63, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 643

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedNovember 8, 1905

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 52 S.E. 82 (Kolman 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.

Bluebook

Kolman v. State, 52 S.E. 82, 124 Ga. 63, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 643 (Ga. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

BeoK, J.

The defendant was tried in the city court of Savannah, charged' with the offense of a misdemeanor, and, after conviction, moved for a new trial, which motion the court overruled, and the defendant excepted. The defendant’s motion was based upon the general grounds that the verdict was contrary to law and the evidence and without evidence to support it. -The evidence upon the main question in the case (that is as to whether the defendant was guilty of the specific offense charged, to ivit, that he “did instigate the cruel treatment of a domestic animal”) is conflicting; but the motion for a netv trial should have been sustained upon the ground that the verdict was contrary to law and the evidence, inasmuch as the record does not disclose that there was any evidence whatever to show that the crime was committed in Chatham county, as alleged in the indictment, the only evidence tending to locate the scene of the alleged offense being to the effect that it was committed at the corner of “Farm and Bryan,” without even naming the city in which Farm and Bryan are situated; and courts do not take judicial cognizance of such facts. Alexander v. State, 105 Ga. 834; Carter v. State, 48 Ga. 43.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

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

BeoK, J.

The defendant was tried in the city court of Savannah, charged' with the offense of a misdemeanor, and, after conviction, moved for a new trial, which motion the court overruled, and the defendant excepted. The defendant’s motion was based upon the general grounds that the verdict was contrary to law and the evidence and without evidence to support it. -The evidence upon the main question in the case (that is as to whether the defendant was guilty of the specific offense charged, to ivit, that he “did instigate the cruel treatment of a domestic animal”) is conflicting; but the motion for a netv trial should have been sustained upon the ground that the verdict was contrary to law and the evidence, inasmuch as the record does not disclose that there was any evidence whatever to show that the crime was committed in Chatham county, as alleged in the indictment, the only evidence tending to locate the scene of the alleged offense being to the effect that it was committed at the corner of “Farm and Bryan,” without even naming the city in which Farm and Bryan are situated; and courts do not take judicial cognizance of such facts. Alexander v. State, 105 Ga. 834; Carter v. State, 48 Ga. 43.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 S.E. 82, 124 Ga. 63, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kolman-v-state-ga-1905.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack