Nix v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Nix v. State

110 S.E. 242, 27 Ga. App. 780, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 422

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 13, 1921

Docket12982

StatusPublished

This text of 110 S.E. 242 (Nix 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

Nix v. State, 110 S.E. 242, 27 Ga. App. 780, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 422 (Ga. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

The defendant was charged with breaking and entering a railroad-ear with intent to steal goods and freight [781]*781therein contained. He assigns error upon the grounds that the evidence did not authorize his conviction, and that the court erred in failing to charge the jury, without request, the law with reference to circumstantial evidence. There is evidence to authorize the defendant’s conviction, and his' conviction was not wholly dependent upon circumstantial evidence. This being true, as has been repeatedly held by the Supreme Court and this court, it was not reversible error to fail to charge the jury upon the law of circumstantial evidence. The verdict having the approval of the trial judge, and there being no harmful error shown, it was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

The defendant was charged with breaking and entering a railroad-ear with intent to steal goods and freight [781]*781therein contained. He assigns error upon the grounds that the evidence did not authorize his conviction, and that the court erred in failing to charge the jury, without request, the law with reference to circumstantial evidence. There is evidence to authorize the defendant’s conviction, and his' conviction was not wholly dependent upon circumstantial evidence. This being true, as has been repeatedly held by the Supreme Court and this court, it was not reversible error to fail to charge the jury upon the law of circumstantial evidence. The verdict having the approval of the trial judge, and there being no harmful error shown, it was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 S.E. 242, 27 Ga. App. 780, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 422, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nix-v-state-gactapp-1921.