Toney v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Toney v. State

116 S.E. 555, 30 Ga. App. 50, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 243

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 7, 1923

Docket14105

StatusPublished

This text of 116 S.E. 555 (Toney 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

Toney v. State, 116 S.E. 555, 30 Ga. App. 50, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 243 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. .The evidence connecting the accused with the perpetration of the offense was not wholly' circumstantial, and the failure of the court to charge the jury the law of circumstantial evidence was not error, there being no request for such instruction.

2. The other grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial are without substantial merit, and the verdict was authorized by the evidence. Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. .The evidence connecting the accused with the perpetration of the offense was not wholly' circumstantial, and the failure of the court to charge the jury the law of circumstantial evidence was not error, there being no request for such instruction.

2. The other grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial are without substantial merit, and the verdict was authorized by the evidence. Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

116 S.E. 555, 30 Ga. App. 50, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/toney-v-state-gactapp-1923.