Sorrow v. State

132 S.E. 272, 35 Ga. App. 201, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 630
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 3, 1926
Docket17006
StatusPublished

This text of 132 S.E. 272 (Sorrow 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
Sorrow v. State, 132 S.E. 272, 35 Ga. App. 201, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 630 (Ga. Ct. App. 1926).

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

The motion for a new trial is based upon the usual general grounds only; the verdict is authorized by the evidence; and, the finding of the jury having been approved by the trial court, this court is without authority to interfere.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. Berry T. Moseley, for plaintiff in error. A. S. Slcelton, solicitor-general, contra.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
132 S.E. 272, 35 Ga. App. 201, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 630, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sorrow-v-state-gactapp-1926.