Pierce v. State
149 S.E. 160, 40 Ga. App. 227, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 97
Opinion
The accused was convicted of manufacturing whisky. The evidence, while authorizing a finding that he was guilty of an attempt to manufacture whisky, was insufficient to support the verdict, and the refusal to grant him a new trial was error. As this ruling is controlling in the case, the special assignments of error are not dealt with.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Pierce v. State, 149 S.E. 160, 40 Ga. App. 227, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 97 (Ga. Ct. App. 1929).
149 S.E. 160 (Pierce v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Bridges v. State
126 S.E.2d 903 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1962)
Harper v. State
94 S.E.2d 105 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1956)
Hammond v. State
171 S.E. 559 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1933)