Shepard v. State
139 S.E. 90, 37 Ga. App. 158, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 541
Opinion
1. An objection to evidence that it is “irrelevant, immaterial, and prejudicial to the defendant” is too general to be considered by the reviewing court. Martin v. State, 35 Ga. App. 575 (2-a) (134 S. E. 185), and cit.
2. Under the facts of the case the excerpt from the charge excepted to shows no cause for a reversal of the judgment below.
3. The general grounds of the motion for a new trial are not argued or insisted upon in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, and are treated as abandoned.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Shepard v. State, 139 S.E. 90, 37 Ga. App. 158, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 541 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).
139 S.E. 90 (Shepard v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Spivey v. Lester
151 S.E. 54 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1929)