Sangster v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Sangster v. State

168 S.E. 920, 46 Ga. App. 692, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 196

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 5, 1933

Docket23001

StatusPublished

This text of 168 S.E. 920 (Sangster 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

Sangster v. State, 168 S.E. 920, 46 Ga. App. 692, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 196 (Ga. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

Under the counter-showing made by the State, and the discretion vested in the trial judge, he did not err in overruling the ground of the motion for a new trial based on alleged newly discovered evidence.

2. The evidence amply supports the verdict; the testimony of the defendant’s accomplice was sufficiently corroborated; and the refusal to- grant a new trial was not error for any reason assigned.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

Under the counter-showing made by the State, and the discretion vested in the trial judge, he did not err in overruling the ground of the motion for a new trial based on alleged newly discovered evidence.

2. The evidence amply supports the verdict; the testimony of the defendant’s accomplice was sufficiently corroborated; and the refusal to- grant a new trial was not error for any reason assigned.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 S.E. 920, 46 Ga. App. 692, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sangster-v-state-gactapp-1933.