Martin v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Martin v. State

103 S.E. 194, 25 Ga. App. 304, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 756

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Martin v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 24 Ga. App. 55 →

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided May 11, 1920·No. 11331·Published

Opinion

Luke, J.

Martin was convicted of the offense of larceny after trust. The sole question raised in the bill of exceptions is as to the proof of venue. The evidence amply authorized the jury to find that the defendant had the intent and did in Chatham county convert the property. The trial judge approved the verdict, and it was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. Walter C. Hartridge, solicitor-general, contra.

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

Luke, J.

Martin was convicted of the offense of larceny after trust. The sole question raised in the bill of exceptions is as to the proof of venue. The evidence amply authorized the jury to find that the defendant had the intent and did in Chatham county convert the property. The trial judge approved the verdict, and it was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. Walter C. Hartridge, solicitor-general, contra.

Martin v. State, 103 S.E. 194, 25 Ga. App. 304, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 756 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

103 S.E. 194 (Martin v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.