Roberts v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Roberts v. State

137 S.E. 412, 36 Ga. App. 582, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 160

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 8, 1927

Docket17794

StatusPublished

This text of 137 S.E. 412 (Roberts 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

Roberts v. State, 137 S.E. 412, 36 Ga. App. 582, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 160 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. The ground of the motion for a new trial complaining of the admission of certain testimony of a named witness is not complete and understandable within itself. Furthermore, substantially the same evidence was elicited from another witness' without any objections from the defendant.

2. The evidence connecting the accused with the offense charged was not wholly circumstantial, and the court, therefore, did not err in failing to charge the law of circumstantial evidence, it not appearing that a written request for such a charge was made.

3. It is never error for the court to refuse to give a charge that is orally requested only. A written request must be presented.

4. The verdict was authorized by the evidence. The case is distinguished by its particular facts from the cases cited in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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