Taff v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Taff v. State

114 S.E. 816, 29 Ga. App. 223, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 184

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 16, 1922

Docket13790

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 114 S.E. 816 (Taff 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

Taff v. State, 114 S.E. 816, 29 Ga. App. 223, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 184 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

Although the evidence raises a strong suspicion of guilt, it is not sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis than that of the guilt of the defendant. It was, therefore, error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. Len B. Ouillebeau, A. W. Powell, for plaintiff in error. John A. Boylcin, solicitor-general, B. A. Stephens, contra.

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

Luke, J.

Although the evidence raises a strong suspicion of guilt, it is not sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis than that of the guilt of the defendant. It was, therefore, error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. Len B. Ouillebeau, A. W. Powell, for plaintiff in error. John A. Boylcin, solicitor-general, B. A. Stephens, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 S.E. 816, 29 Ga. App. 223, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 184, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taff-v-state-gactapp-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack