Mack v. State

74 S.E. 444, 10 Ga. App. 835, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 719
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided April 2, 1912·No. 3717·Published·Cited by 1 cases

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

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

74 S.E. 444 (Mack v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

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