Pritchett v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Pritchett v. State

107 S.E. 285, 27 Ga. App. 56, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 682

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 11, 1921

Docket12326

StatusPublished

This text of 107 S.E. 285 (Pritchett 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

Pritchett v. State, 107 S.E. 285, 27 Ga. App. 56, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 682 (Ga. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

The verdict was authorized by the evidence and approved by the trial judge, and the only assignment of error is upon the overrul[57]*57ing of the motion for a new trial, which contained only the usual general grounds. Judgment affirmed.

Decided May 11, 1921.

Accusation, of possessing intoxicating liquor; from city court of Carrollton — Judge Hood. February 12, 1921.

Emmett Smith, for plaintiff in error. Willis Smith, solicitor, contra. Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur

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

Broyles, C. J.

The verdict was authorized by the evidence and approved by the trial judge, and the only assignment of error is upon the overrul[57]*57ing of the motion for a new trial, which contained only the usual general grounds. Judgment affirmed.

Decided May 11, 1921.

Accusation, of possessing intoxicating liquor; from city court of Carrollton — Judge Hood. February 12, 1921.

Emmett Smith, for plaintiff in error. Willis Smith, solicitor, contra. Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

107 S.E. 285, 27 Ga. App. 56, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 682, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pritchett-v-state-gactapp-1921.