Sellman v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Sellman v. State

129 S.E. 22, 34 Ga. App. 189, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 138

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 14, 1925

Docket16459

StatusPublished

This text of 129 S.E. 22 (Sellman 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

Sellman v. State, 129 S.E. 22, 34 Ga. App. 189, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 138 (Ga. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

Plaintiffs in error were convicted of the oifense of simple larceny. The evidence did not authorize the conviction of the defendants upon the indictment. Eor this reason the court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Bloodworth, J., concurs. Broyles, O. J., dissents. Scott, Hornbuclcle & Moore, for plaintiffs in error. John A. Boylcin, solicitor-general, 1L A. Stephens, Ralph H. Pharr, contra.

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

Luke, J.

Plaintiffs in error were convicted of the oifense of simple larceny. The evidence did not authorize the conviction of the defendants upon the indictment. Eor this reason the court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Bloodworth, J., concurs. Broyles, O. J., dissents. Scott, Hornbuclcle & Moore, for plaintiffs in error. John A. Boylcin, solicitor-general, 1L A. Stephens, Ralph H. Pharr, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

129 S.E. 22, 34 Ga. App. 189, 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sellman-v-state-gactapp-1925.