May v. State
36 S.E. 222, 111 Ga. 840, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 799
Opinion
Even if the evidence was sufficient to show that the defendant committed the larceny with which she stood charged, a new trial should nevertheless have been granted, because no proof was made of the value of the article alleged to have been stolen, nor of the time at which the larceny was committed.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
May v. State, 36 S.E. 222, 111 Ga. 840, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 799 (Ga. 1900).
36 S.E. 222 (May v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Studdard v. State
170 S.E.2d 46 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1969)
Moore v. State
182 S.E. 823 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Ayers v. State
59 S.E. 924 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1907)
Lane v. State
39 S.E. 463 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1901)