Tucker v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Tucker v. State

102 S.E. 880, 25 Ga. App. 196, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 687

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 13, 1920

Docket11289

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 102 S.E. 880 (Tucker 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

Tucker v. State, 102 S.E. 880, 25 Ga. App. 196, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 687 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. Where a long excerpt from the charge of the court is assigned as error on the ground “ that it was an expression of opinion by the judge presiding, as to what had been proved on the trial of the case,” without stating what the expression was, or pointing out the particular part or parts of the excerpts complained of, and the excerpt as a whole is not subject to the criticism made, the assignment of error is too vague, indefinite, and uncertain to be considered. Roberts v. State, 92 Ga. 451 (3) (17 S. E. 262).

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

1. Where a long excerpt from the charge of the court is assigned as error on the ground “ that it was an expression of opinion by the judge presiding, as to what had been proved on the trial of the case,” without stating what the expression was, or pointing out the particular part or parts of the excerpts complained of, and the excerpt as a whole is not subject to the criticism made, the assignment of error is too vague, indefinite, and uncertain to be considered. Roberts v. State, 92 Ga. 451 (3) (17 S. E. 262).

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

102 S.E. 880, 25 Ga. App. 196, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 687, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tucker-v-state-gactapp-1920.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack