Riley v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Riley v. State

60 S.E. 274, 3 Ga. App. 534, 1908 Ga. App. LEXIS 365

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 29, 1908

Docket908

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 60 S.E. 274 (Riley 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

Riley v. State, 60 S.E. 274, 3 Ga. App. 534, 1908 Ga. App. LEXIS 365 (Ga. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

Russell, J.

1. The judgment refusing a new trial is not, for any reason-assigned, erroneous.

2. In the absence of a written request for fuller instruction, the charge-upon the subject of reasonable doubts is not erroneous.

3. To instruct the jury that, as applied to this case, justifiable homicide-means self-defense against one who, by violence or surprise, manifestly intends or endeavors to commit a felony on the person, is not error,, where it appears, as in this case, that it was uneontradicted that the-assault was made, as contended by the defendant himself, in defense either of his own person or that of his wife. Eor that reason the-language used was not an intimation of opinion UDon the evidence by the court.

4. The jury were properly instructed that one can derive no benefit from the principles of self-defense if it appears that he himself provoked the-difficulty and himself created the necessity to defend.

Judgment aiJirmad.

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

Russell, J.

1. The judgment refusing a new trial is not, for any reason-assigned, erroneous.

2. In the absence of a written request for fuller instruction, the charge-upon the subject of reasonable doubts is not erroneous.

3. To instruct the jury that, as applied to this case, justifiable homicide-means self-defense against one who, by violence or surprise, manifestly intends or endeavors to commit a felony on the person, is not error,, where it appears, as in this case, that it was uneontradicted that the-assault was made, as contended by the defendant himself, in defense either of his own person or that of his wife. Eor that reason the-language used was not an intimation of opinion UDon the evidence by the court.

4. The jury were properly instructed that one can derive no benefit from the principles of self-defense if it appears that he himself provoked the-difficulty and himself created the necessity to defend.

Judgment aiJirmad.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 S.E. 274, 3 Ga. App. 534, 1908 Ga. App. LEXIS 365, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/riley-v-state-gactapp-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack