Troup v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Troup v. State

117 S.E. 410, 30 Ga. App. 346, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 448

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 12, 1923

Docket14454

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 117 S.E. 410 (Troup 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

Troup v. State, 117 S.E. 410, 30 Ga. App. 346, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 448 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodwoktu, J.

1. Tlie court did not err in the admission or exclusion of evidence as complained of in the motion for a new trial.

2. The conviction of the accused not being entirely dependent upon circumstantial evidence, the court did not err, in the absence of a timely and appropriate written request, in failing to charge the jury “ the rule of evidence as contained in section 1010 of the Penal Code (1910) of Georgia.”

[347]*347Decided June 12, 1923. V. E. Padgett, for plaintiff in error. Wade II. Watson, solicitor, contra.

3. Under the facts of this ease the court did not err in charging the jury “ that if the liquor in question was on the defendant’s premises without his knowledge and consent, he would not be guilty; if you find it was there with his knowledge and consent, he would be guilty.”

4. There was evidence to support the verdict, and tne court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

■Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., mid ÍAilce, •/., concur.

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