Ross v. State

89 S.E. 589, 18 Ga. App. 503, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 1059
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJuly 29, 1916
Docket7557
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 89 S.E. 589 (Ross 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
Ross v. State, 89 S.E. 589, 18 Ga. App. 503, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 1059 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916).

Opinion

Wade, O. J.

1. Where alleged newly discovered evidence, presented as the basis of a motion for a new trial, “is that of witnesses, affidavits as to their residence, associates, means of knowledge, character, and credibility must be adduced.” Beatty v. State, 16 Ga. App. 571 (85 S. E. 766). Oivil Code, § 6086. No such affidavit appears in the record in this case. “The absence of testimony sufficient to support the credibility of witnesses who purport to furnish newly discovered evidence is fatal to a ground of a motion for a new trial based thereon, if the trial judge sees proper to overrule it.” Winder v. State, ante, 67 (88 S. E. 1003).

2. The general grounds of the motion for a new trial are expressly [504]*504abandoned by the plaintiffs in error and “the sole ground relied upon by them is that of newly discovered evidence.” Judgment affirmed.

Decided July 29, 1916. Accusation of gaming; from city court of Cartersville — Judge Moon. April 19, 1916. William T. Townsend, for plaintiff in error. Watt H. Milner, solicitor, contra.

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

Related

McCaskill v. State
136 S.E. 461 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
89 S.E. 589, 18 Ga. App. 503, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 1059, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ross-v-state-gactapp-1916.