Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Rogers v. State

Rogers v. State

103 S.E. 714, 25 Ga. App. 477, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 19
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided July 14, 1920·No. 11530·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

The motion for a new trial contained, only the usual general grounds. The evidence, while circumstantial, was sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of the defendant’s guilt, and the court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. E. M. Price, Joseph Law, for plaintiff in error,

cited: Ga. App.: 14/598; 16/291; 21/655; 23/144; 23/785.

A. L. Franklin, solicitor-general, John M. Graham, contra,

cited: Ga. App.: 21/493 (1) 21/49 (Cole v. State).

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

Rogers v. State, 103 S.E. 714, 25 Ga. App. 477, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 19 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

103 S.E. 714 (Rogers v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hobbs v. State
107 S.E.2d 253 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1959)