Strickland v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Strickland v. State

145 S.E. 539, 38 Ga. App. 689, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 401

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 13, 1928

Docket19190

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 145 S.E. 539 (Strickland 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

Strickland v. State, 145 S.E. 539, 38 Ga. App. 689, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 401 (Ga. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, O. J.

1. “The evidence in support- of the defense of alibi was not of such clear and strong probative value as to require from the court an instruction on the law of alibi, especially in the absence of a timely written request.” Bonner v. State, 26 Ga. App. 185 (6) (105 S. E. 863), and cit.

Under this ruling and the facts of the instant ease, the failure to charge the law of alibi was not error.

2. The remaining grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial (ground 6 being expressly abandoned in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error) show no cause for a reversal of the judgment.

3. The verdict was amply authorized by the evidence, and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. Hubert F. Rawls, for plaintiff in error. A. B. Spence, solicitor-general, T. R. Gress, assistant attorney-general, contra.

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