Morgan v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Morgan v. State

85 S.E. 254, 16 Ga. App. 267, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 581

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 4, 1915

Docket6243

StatusPublished

This text of 85 S.E. 254 (Morgan 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

Morgan v. State, 85 S.E. 254, 16 Ga. App. 267, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 581 (Ga. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinions

Broyles, J.

1. Under the conflicting evidence and the defendant’s statement at the trial, the jury would have been authorized to And a verdict of murder, or of voluntary manslaughter, or justifiable homicide. The trial judge therefore did not err in charging the jury on the law of voluntary manslaughter.

2. The court did not err in refusing to give the requested instructions set out in paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the amendment to the motion for a' new trial. While the requests contain correct statements of law, under the evidence these were not involved as issues in the case.

3. The evidence authorized the verdict; no error of law appears, and the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial is Affirmed.

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

Broyles, J.

1. Under the conflicting evidence and the defendant’s statement at the trial, the jury would have been authorized to And a verdict of murder, or of voluntary manslaughter, or justifiable homicide. The trial judge therefore did not err in charging the jury on the law of voluntary manslaughter.

2. The court did not err in refusing to give the requested instructions set out in paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the amendment to the motion for a' new trial. While the requests contain correct statements of law, under the evidence these were not involved as issues in the case.

3. The evidence authorized the verdict; no error of law appears, and the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial is Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

85 S.E. 254, 16 Ga. App. 267, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 581, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morgan-v-state-gactapp-1915.