Tomlin v. State
This text of 34 S.E. 845 (Tomlin 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
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.
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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
34 S.E. 845, 110 Ga. 268, 1899 Ga. LEXIS 529, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tomlin-v-state-ga-1899.