Shirley v. State

90 S.E. 277, 146 Ga. 9, 1916 Ga. LEXIS 542
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedOctober 18, 1916
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 90 S.E. 277 (Shirley v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Shirley v. State, 90 S.E. 277, 146 Ga. 9, 1916 Ga. LEXIS 542 (Ga. 1916).

Opinion

Hill, J.

1. There was no abuse of discretion in overruling the ground of the motion for a new trial which was based on newly discovered evidence.

2. Causes of challenge to a juror propter defectum must be discovered and urged before verdict.” Henderson v. Fox, 83 Ga. 233 (7), 245 (9 S. E. 839); Brown v. State, 105 Ga. 640 (31 S. E. 557). Accordingly it is too late, after verdict, to except to the service of a juror on the ground that he was under twenty-one years of age at the time of the verdict.

3. The verdict is supported by the evidence.

4. The other grounds of the motion for a new trial are without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. Indictment for murder. Before Judge Worley. Franklin superior court. April 29, 1916. J. S. Haley and W. L. Hodges, for plaintiff in error. Clifford Walker, attorney-general, Thomas J. Brown, solicitor-general, and Mark Bolding, contra.

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

Related

Hannah v. State
194 S.E. 832 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1938)
Roush v. United States
47 F.2d 444 (Fifth Circuit, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
90 S.E. 277, 146 Ga. 9, 1916 Ga. LEXIS 542, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shirley-v-state-ga-1916.