Powell v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Powell v. State

132 S.E. 919, 35 Ga. App. 245, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 664

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided April 14, 1926·No. 17086·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

1. The only special ground of the motion for a new trial is too indefinite to be considered. “Grounds of a motion for new trial should be complete within themselves.” Daniel v. Schwarzweiss, 144 Ga. 81 (1) (86 S. E. 239).

2. There was some evidence to support the verdict, the trial judge approved it, and, no error of law having been committed on the trial, this court is powerless to interfere.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Bloodworth, J.

1. The only special ground of the motion for a new trial is too indefinite to be considered. “Grounds of a motion for new trial should be complete within themselves.” Daniel v. Schwarzweiss, 144 Ga. 81 (1) (86 S. E. 239).

2. There was some evidence to support the verdict, the trial judge approved it, and, no error of law having been committed on the trial, this court is powerless to interfere.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Powell v. State, 132 S.E. 919, 35 Ga. App. 245, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 664 (Ga. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

132 S.E. 919 (Powell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related