Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Manning v. State

Manning v. State

79 S.E. 905, 13 Ga. App. 709, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 336
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedOctober 29, 1913
Docket5223
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 79 S.E. 905 (Manning 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
Manning v. State, 79 S.E. 905, 13 Ga. App. 709, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 336 (Ga. Ct. App. 1913).

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

On the trial of one for the offense of selling liquor, the solicitor-general, in closing his argument, used the following language: “These blind tigers are running around all over the country, sending souls to hell, and have no respect for Jesus Christ or woman, and you ought to stop that kind of stuff. Everything you hear is people all over the country talking about blind tigers, and I ask you not to tolerate this stuff, and I ask you to help me convict them.” The attorney for the accused objected to this language, and moved the court for a mistrial. Unquestionably the language used by the solicitor-general was improper, and the court should have declared a mistrial, or should have admonished the jury that the language was improper and not to regard it or give it any weight in their deliberations. The case is a close one on the [710]*710evidence, and for this reason we more readily grant a new trial. It was not a fair inference, from the evidence, that the defendant was a "blind tiger” as defined by the Supreme Court. Only one sale was proved, and that by a witness who probably had ill will towards the accused. Judgment reversed.

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

Related

Cantrell v. State
660 S.E.2d 468 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2008)
Hamilton v. State
272 S.E.2d 763 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1980)
Clements v. State
103 S.E.2d 655 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1958)
Emerson v. State
82 S.E.2d 882 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1954)
Josey v. State
79 S.E.2d 64 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1953)
Ralls v. State
75 S.E.2d 26 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1953)
Smith v. State
41 S.E.2d 541 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1947)
Southeastern Air Services Inc. v. Edwards
40 S.E.2d 572 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1946)
Trammell v. Atlanta Coach Co.
181 S.E. 315 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Cliett v. State
167 S.E. 610 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1933)
Bryan v. State
137 S.E. 797 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1927)
Reese v. State
87 S.E. 717 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1916)
Mitchell v. State
86 S.E. 737 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1915)
Hinsman v. State
81 S.E. 367 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1914)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
79 S.E. 905, 13 Ga. App. 709, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 336, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manning-v-state-gactapp-1913.