Tomlin v. State

34 S.E. 845, 110 Ga. 268, 1899 Ga. LEXIS 529
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided November 28, 1899·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Cobb, J.

1. It is not an abuse of discretion to refuse to grant a continuance upon the ground of absent witnesses, where the applicant therefor fails to show afiirmatively to the court that the application is not made for delay, and where from all the facts before him the judge is warranted in finding that such-was the purpose for which the continuance is sought. Penal Code, §962.

Submitted November 6. Decided November 28, 1899. Indictment for assault with intent to murder. Before Judge Littlejohn. Chattahoochee superior court. March term, 1899. T. T. Miller and E. J. Wynn, for plaintiff in error. S. P. Gilbert, solicitor-general, contra.

2. There was sufficient evidence to support the verdict, and the judgment of the trial court refusing a new trial will not be reversed.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.

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

Tomlin v. State, 34 S.E. 845, 110 Ga. 268, 1899 Ga. LEXIS 529 (Ga. 1899).

34 S.E. 845 (Tomlin v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Curry v. State
340 S.E.2d 250 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1986)
Harris v. State
165 S.E.2d 462 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1968)
Vaughn v. State
118 S.E. 758 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
Brooks v. State
60 S.E. 211 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1908)