Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Paden v. State

Paden v. State

86 S.E. 287, 17 Ga. App. 112, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 278
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided September 17, 1915·No. 6142·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

Russell, C. J.

The newly discovered evidence offered in support of the motion for a new trial being of such a character as probably would cause a different result upon another investigation, the trial judge erred in overruling the motion. Although newly discovered evidence may be somewhat cumulative of testimony previously introduced, and impeaching in its character, the real ultimate criterion by which the merit of such testimony should be measured is the probability of a different result. Mitchell v. State, 6 Ga. App. 554 (4), 558 (65 S. E. 326); Nolan v. State, 14 Ga. App. 824 (82. S. E. 377), and citations.

Judgment reversed.

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

Paden v. State, 86 S.E. 287, 17 Ga. App. 112, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 278 (Ga. Ct. App. 1915).

86 S.E. 287 (Paden v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stembridge v. State
65 S.E.2d 819 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1951)
Whitley v. State
54 S.E.2d 486 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1949)
McDaniel v. State
38 S.E.2d 697 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1946)
North v. State
29 S.E.2d 923 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1944)
Cawthon v. State
16 S.E.2d 247 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1941)
Taylor v. State
4 S.E.2d 484 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1939)
Harper v. State
177 S.E. 886 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1934)
Hope v. Biggers
166 S.E. 686 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1932)
Gay v. Hurst
155 S.E. 346 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1930)
Todd v. Jackson
101 S.E. 192 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1919)