Scott v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Scott v. State

66 Ga. App. 659

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Scott v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 63 Ga. App. 353 →

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided February 26, 1942·No. 29468·Published

Opinion

Gardner, J.

The accused was tried on an indictment for murder, and was convicted of voluntary manslaughter. He excepted to the refusal of a new trial.

1. The evidence would have supported a verdict of a higher offense; it amply sustained the verdict of voluntary manslaughter. The evidence was so simple and clear in support of the verdict that we do not see any benefit to be gained by relating it here.

2. The court did not err in overruling the motion for new trial, based on the' general grounds.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur. F. Joe Turner, Frank A. Bowers, for plaintiff in error. John A. Boykin, solicitor-general, Durwood T. Pye, J. R. Parham, contra.

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

Gardner, J.

The accused was tried on an indictment for murder, and was convicted of voluntary manslaughter. He excepted to the refusal of a new trial.

1. The evidence would have supported a verdict of a higher offense; it amply sustained the verdict of voluntary manslaughter. The evidence was so simple and clear in support of the verdict that we do not see any benefit to be gained by relating it here.

2. The court did not err in overruling the motion for new trial, based on the' general grounds.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur. F. Joe Turner, Frank A. Bowers, for plaintiff in error. John A. Boykin, solicitor-general, Durwood T. Pye, J. R. Parham, contra.

Scott v. State, 66 Ga. App. 659 (Ga. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

66 Ga. App. 659 (Scott v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.