Odom v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Odom v. State

112 S.E. 379, 28 Ga. App. 545, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 672

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 9, 1922

Docket13363

StatusPublished

This text of 112 S.E. 379 (Odom 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

Odom v. State, 112 S.E. 379, 28 Ga. App. 545, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 672 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

1. There is no merit in any of the grounds of the motion for a new trial.

2. There is evidence to support the finding of the jury, and “the verdict having been approved by the trial judge, under the repeated and uniform rulings of this court and of the Supreme Court a reviewing court is powerless to interfere. When the verdict is apparently decidedly against the weight of evidence, the trial judge has a wide discretion as to granting or refusing a new trial; but whenever there is any evidence, however slight, to support a verdict which has been approved by the trial judge, this court is absolutely without authority to control the judgment of the trial court.” Bradham v. State, 21 Ga. App 510 (94 S. E. 618), and cit.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Bloodworth, J.

1. There is no merit in any of the grounds of the motion for a new trial.

2. There is evidence to support the finding of the jury, and “the verdict having been approved by the trial judge, under the repeated and uniform rulings of this court and of the Supreme Court a reviewing court is powerless to interfere. When the verdict is apparently decidedly against the weight of evidence, the trial judge has a wide discretion as to granting or refusing a new trial; but whenever there is any evidence, however slight, to support a verdict which has been approved by the trial judge, this court is absolutely without authority to control the judgment of the trial court.” Bradham v. State, 21 Ga. App 510 (94 S. E. 618), and cit.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

112 S.E. 379, 28 Ga. App. 545, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/odom-v-state-gactapp-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack