Sexton v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Sexton v. State

196 Ga. 298

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided July 7, 1943·No. No. 14589·Published

Opinion

Jenkins, Justice.

The sole assignment of error relating to the refusal to grant a new trial, the motion therefor being based on the general grounds only, there being sufficient evidence to support the verdict, and the same having the approval of the trial judge, the judgment is affirmed. Goolsby v. State, 196 Ga. 188 (26 S. E. 2d, 181).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. W. L. Denton and G. B. McGarity, for plaintiff in error. T. Grady Head, attorney-general, Hal G. Hutchens, solicitor-general, W. A. Foster Jr., and L. G. Groves, assistant attorney-general, contra.

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

Jenkins, Justice.

The sole assignment of error relating to the refusal to grant a new trial, the motion therefor being based on the general grounds only, there being sufficient evidence to support the verdict, and the same having the approval of the trial judge, the judgment is affirmed. Goolsby v. State, 196 Ga. 188 (26 S. E. 2d, 181).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. W. L. Denton and G. B. McGarity, for plaintiff in error. T. Grady Head, attorney-general, Hal G. Hutchens, solicitor-general, W. A. Foster Jr., and L. G. Groves, assistant attorney-general, contra.

Sexton v. State, 196 Ga. 298 (Ga. 1943).

Pincite

196 Ga. 298 (Sexton v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related