Strickland v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Strickland v. State

169 S.E. 266, 46 Ga. App. 782, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 243

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 2, 1933

Docket23002

StatusPublished

This text of 169 S.E. 266 (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, 169 S.E. 266, 46 Ga. App. 782, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 243 (Ga. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

MacIntyre, J.

The accusation contained three counts, viz.: first, possession; second, sale; and, third, transportation of intoxicating liquors. The jury returned a verdict of guilty on counts 1 and 3, and not guilty on count 2. The motion for a new trial contained the usual general grounds only. The evidence connecting the defendant with the offense, while wholly circumstantial, was sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis except that of his guilt; and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., aAxd Guerry, J., eoneur.

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

MacIntyre, J.

The accusation contained three counts, viz.: first, possession; second, sale; and, third, transportation of intoxicating liquors. The jury returned a verdict of guilty on counts 1 and 3, and not guilty on count 2. The motion for a new trial contained the usual general grounds only. The evidence connecting the defendant with the offense, while wholly circumstantial, was sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis except that of his guilt; and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., aAxd Guerry, J., eoneur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 S.E. 266, 46 Ga. App. 782, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/strickland-v-state-gactapp-1933.