Mack v. State

74 S.E. 444, 10 Ga. App. 835, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 719
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedApril 2, 1912
Docket3717
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 74 S.E. 444 (Mack 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
Mack v. State, 74 S.E. 444, 10 Ga. App. 835, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 719 (Ga. Ct. App. 1912).

Opinion

Russell, J.

1. A judgment' overruling a demurrer to an accusation

should be excepted to directly by exceptions pendente lite, properly preserved in the record, or by exceptions in the final bill of exceptions, . timely filed. It does not constitute a proper ground in a motion for a new trial. Williams v. State, 4 Ga. App. 853 (62 S. E. 525).

2. Grounds contained in an amendment to a motion for a new trial, not . vex-ified or .approved by the trial judge, can not be considered by this court. Soell v. State, 4 Ga. App. 337 (61 S. E. 514) ; Wilson v. Cobb, 4 Ga. App. 272 (61 S. E. 133).

3. The evidence in support of the verdict is very weak and unsatisfactory, but this court can not say that the verdict is wholly unauthorized.

Judgment affirmed. Pottle, J., not presiding.

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

Related

Hart v. State
186 S.E. 152 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
74 S.E. 444, 10 Ga. App. 835, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 719, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mack-v-state-gactapp-1912.