Motes v. State

142 S.E. 703, 38 Ga. App. 86, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 50
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedApril 10, 1928
Docket18693
StatusPublished

This text of 142 S.E. 703 (Motes 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
Motes v. State, 142 S.E. 703, 38 Ga. App. 86, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 50 (Ga. Ct. App. 1928).

Opinion

Bloodwoktii, J.

1, The defendant's motion fox a continuance was upon the ground that he was physically unable to stand trial. He was present in court and the trial judge had an opportunity to consider his condition, as well as the evidence adduced on the hearing of the motion, and it does not appear that the judge abused his discretion in refusing to grant a continuance. Rowland v. State, 125 Ga. 792 (54 S. E. 694) ; Ogletree v. Slate, 22 Ga. App. 628 (96 S. E. 1049).

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, no error of law is shown, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., eonour.

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

Related

Rowland v. State
54 S.E. 694 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1906)
Ogletree v. State
96 S.E. 1049 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1918)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
142 S.E. 703, 38 Ga. App. 86, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 50, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/motes-v-state-gactapp-1928.