Tiller v. State

36 S.E. 201, 111 Ga. 840, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 801
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided June 5, 1900·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Simmons, C. J.

1. A party to a case has the right to introduce all competent, relevant, and material evidence, either to prove the main issue involved, or to discredit the evidence of a witness for the opposite party.

2. Where A, B, 0, and ~D were indicted for gaming, and A was put upon trial, and the Rtate’s witness testified that he had seen A, B, C, and D all at a certain place engaged in gambling, it was competent for the accused to introduce evidence to show that B was not at the place desig[841] uated, but at another place, at the time specified by the State’s -witness. This evidence was material to the issue, and was admissible for the purpose of discrediting the State’s witness.

Argued May 21, —Decided June 5, 1900. Indictment for gaming. Before Judge Reese. Hart superior court. March term, 1900. 0. Roberts and J. N. Worley, for plaintiff in error. R. II. Lewis, solicitor-general, by Harrison & Bryan, contra.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concurring, except Fish, J., absent.

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

Tiller v. State, 36 S.E. 201, 111 Ga. 840, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 801 (Ga. 1900).

36 S.E. 201 (Tiller v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wilson v. State
252 S.E.2d 8 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1978)
Daugherty v. State
168 S.E.2d 155 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1969)
Light v. State
123 S.E.2d 201 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1961)
Conley v. State
26 S.E.2d 845 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1943)
Owensby v. State
98 S.E. 552 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1919)
State v. Kampert
165 N.W. 972 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1918)