Tuggle v. State
This text of 101 S.E. 767 (Tuggle 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.
Opinion
1. The court did not err in excluding the testimony of a witness given on the defendant’s commitment trial, it not appearing that the witness had died, or become disqualified or inaccessible, since that trial. See Penal Code (1910), § 1027.
2. The 2d special ground of the motion for a new trial is expressly abandoned in the brief of counsel for plaintiff in error.
3. Under the repeated rulings of the Supreme Court and of this court that a special ground of a motion for a new trial must be complete and understandable within itself, the 3d special ground of the motion for a new trial is too defective to be considered.
4. The defendant’s conviction was authorized by the evidence, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
101 S.E. 767, 24 Ga. App. 655, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 436, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tuggle-v-state-gactapp-1920.