Thurmon v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Thurmon v. State

111 S.E. 738, 28 Ga. App. 504, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 643

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 14, 1922

Docket13310

StatusPublished

This text of 111 S.E. 738 (Thurmon 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

Thurmon v. State, 111 S.E. 738, 28 Ga. App. 504, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 643 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. The only ground of the amendment to the motion for a new trial is as follows: “Because, after the hearing of the above-stated ease, and after the verdict had been rendered, and after movant had been sentenced, newly discovered evidence has come into his hands, of which he had no knowledge nor means of obtaining same at or before the time of the trial.” Following this ground the record contains several affidavits evidently relating to it, but these affidavits cannot be considered, since they are not embodied or referred to in the ground, nor attached thereto as exhibits, nor identified in any manner. Summerlin v. State, 130 Ga. 791 (61 S. E. 849); Leathers v. Leathers, 132 Ga. 211 (5) (63 S. E. 1118).

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and it was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

•Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., eoneur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. The only ground of the amendment to the motion for a new trial is as follows: “Because, after the hearing of the above-stated ease, and after the verdict had been rendered, and after movant had been sentenced, newly discovered evidence has come into his hands, of which he had no knowledge nor means of obtaining same at or before the time of the trial.” Following this ground the record contains several affidavits evidently relating to it, but these affidavits cannot be considered, since they are not embodied or referred to in the ground, nor attached thereto as exhibits, nor identified in any manner. Summerlin v. State, 130 Ga. 791 (61 S. E. 849); Leathers v. Leathers, 132 Ga. 211 (5) (63 S. E. 1118).

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and it was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

•Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., eoneur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 S.E. 738, 28 Ga. App. 504, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thurmon-v-state-gactapp-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack