Taylor v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Taylor v. State

112 S.E. 161, 28 Ga. App. 562, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 692

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 9, 1922

Docket13404

StatusPublished

This text of 112 S.E. 161 (Taylor 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

Taylor v. State, 112 S.E. 161, 28 Ga. App. 562, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 692 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

There was some evidence to authorize the conviction, and the verdict has the unqualified approval of the trial judge. The only special ground of the motion for new trial is based upon newly discovered evidence, and is without merit. At best, the newly discovered evidence was hearsay and cumulative; and it did not meet the requirement that it would likely produce a different result upon another trial. It was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

There was some evidence to authorize the conviction, and the verdict has the unqualified approval of the trial judge. The only special ground of the motion for new trial is based upon newly discovered evidence, and is without merit. At best, the newly discovered evidence was hearsay and cumulative; and it did not meet the requirement that it would likely produce a different result upon another trial. It was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

112 S.E. 161, 28 Ga. App. 562, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 692, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-state-gactapp-1922.