Tillery v. State
This text of 25 S.E. 170 (Tillery v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This case presents no new or important legal question; the evidence pro and cbn as to relationship between the prosecutor and one of the jurors was confused and conflicting, •and the judge was warranted in finding that the alleged relationship did not exist; the evidence did not demand a charge [210]*210upon, the law of involuntary manslaughter, and even if the-statement of the accused authorized a charge upon this subject, no such charge was requested; no error of law was committed at ‘the trial, and there was ample evidence to support the verdict. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
25 S.E. 170, 99 Ga. 209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tillery-v-state-ga-1896.