Moore v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Moore v. State

159 S.E. 134, 43 Ga. App. 428, 1931 Ga. App. LEXIS 406

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 9, 1931

Docket21492

StatusPublished

This text of 159 S.E. 134 (Moore 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

Moore v. State, 159 S.E. 134, 43 Ga. App. 428, 1931 Ga. App. LEXIS 406 (Ga. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

The accused was convicted of simple larceny (cattle stealing), and the only assignment of error in the bill of exceptions is upon the overruling of his motion for a new trial which contained the usual general grounds only. The evidence authorized the verdict; and the finding of the jury having been approved by the trial judge, and no error of law being complained of, this court is without authority to interfere.

Judgment affirmed,.

Lulce, J., concurs. Bloodworlh, J., absent on account of illness.

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

Broyles, C. J.

The accused was convicted of simple larceny (cattle stealing), and the only assignment of error in the bill of exceptions is upon the overruling of his motion for a new trial which contained the usual general grounds only. The evidence authorized the verdict; and the finding of the jury having been approved by the trial judge, and no error of law being complained of, this court is without authority to interfere.

Judgment affirmed,.

Lulce, J., concurs. Bloodworlh, J., absent on account of illness.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

159 S.E. 134, 43 Ga. App. 428, 1931 Ga. App. LEXIS 406, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-state-gactapp-1931.