Osterholtz v. State
96 S.E. 1045, 22 Ga. App. 649, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 658
This text of 96 S.E. 1045 (Osterholtz 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
Osterholtz v. State, 96 S.E. 1045, 22 Ga. App. 649, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 658 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).
Opinion
The accused was tried by the judge without the intervention of a jury. There was sufficient evidence to sustain the conviction, and this court will not interfere with the discretion of the trial judge in overruling the motion for new trial, which was based on general grounds only.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
96 S.E. 1045, 22 Ga. App. 649, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 658, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/osterholtz-v-state-gactapp-1918.