Phillips v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Phillips v. State

125 S.E. 735, 33 Ga. App. 171, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 801

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 9, 1924

Docket15967

StatusPublished

This text of 125 S.E. 735 (Phillips 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

Phillips v. State, 125 S.E. 735, 33 Ga. App. 171, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 801 (Ga. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

The motion for a new trial in this case contains no special grounds. The verdict has the approval of the trial judge, and we can not say that there is no evidence to support it. Applications for new trial on the ground that the verdict is contrary to the evidence are addressed to a sound legal discretion to be exercised by the trial judge. When this discretion has been exercised and the motion for a new trial overruled, this court will not interfere, if there is any evidenca.which would justify the jury in reaching the conclusion set forth in the verdict. This is true even in cases where the evidence might be described as weak, unsatisfactory, and doubtful. The wisdom and discretion of the trial judge are sufficient for this court to endorse his judgment in cases of this character. Terrell v. State, 29 Ga. App. 285 (114 S. E. 909).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and LuJce, J., concur.

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

Bloodworth, J.

The motion for a new trial in this case contains no special grounds. The verdict has the approval of the trial judge, and we can not say that there is no evidence to support it. Applications for new trial on the ground that the verdict is contrary to the evidence are addressed to a sound legal discretion to be exercised by the trial judge. When this discretion has been exercised and the motion for a new trial overruled, this court will not interfere, if there is any evidenca.which would justify the jury in reaching the conclusion set forth in the verdict. This is true even in cases where the evidence might be described as weak, unsatisfactory, and doubtful. The wisdom and discretion of the trial judge are sufficient for this court to endorse his judgment in cases of this character. Terrell v. State, 29 Ga. App. 285 (114 S. E. 909).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and LuJce, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 S.E. 735, 33 Ga. App. 171, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 801, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phillips-v-state-gactapp-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack