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

Patterson v. State

120 S.E. 34, 31 Ga. App. 154, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 794
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedNovember 14, 1923
Docket14825
StatusPublished

This text of 120 S.E. 34 (Patterson 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
Patterson v. State, 120 S.E. 34, 31 Ga. App. 154, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 794 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Opinion

Luke, J.

The defendant was tried upon an indictment charging seduction, and was convicted of fornication. He moved for a new trial upon the grounds, (a) that the evidence did not authorize the verdict, and (6) that the court erred in admitting a certain letter in evidence. There was no error in admitting the letter in evidence (see Arnold v. Adams, 4 Ga. App. 56 (2), 60 S. E. 815), and the defendant’s conviction was authorized by the evi[155]*155deuce. See Hopper v. Skate, 54 Ga. 389; Boggs v. State, 11 Ga. App. 92 (74 S. E. 716). It was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

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

Related

Hopper v. State
54 Ga. 389 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1875)
Arnold v. Adams
60 S.E. 815 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1908)
Boggs v. State
74 S.E. 716 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
120 S.E. 34, 31 Ga. App. 154, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 794, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patterson-v-state-gactapp-1923.