Usom v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Usom v. State

22 S.E. 399, 97 Ga. 194

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMarch 18, 1895

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 22 S.E. 399 (Usom 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.

Bluebook

Usom v. State, 22 S.E. 399, 97 Ga. 194 (Ga. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Simmons, C. J.

The corpus delicti was clearly proved, and although the evidence to identify the accused as the perpetrator of the crime was not strong nor entirely satisfactory to this. court, it was sufficient to warrant a finding that he was the guilty party. This court, therefore, cannot control the discretion of the judge below, who was satisfied with the verdict, in. refusing to grant a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

J. Z. Foster and Frey & Frey, for plaintiff in error. George R. Brovm, solicitor-general, by Harrison & Peeples, contra.

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

Simmons, C. J.

The corpus delicti was clearly proved, and although the evidence to identify the accused as the perpetrator of the crime was not strong nor entirely satisfactory to this. court, it was sufficient to warrant a finding that he was the guilty party. This court, therefore, cannot control the discretion of the judge below, who was satisfied with the verdict, in. refusing to grant a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

J. Z. Foster and Frey & Frey, for plaintiff in error. George R. Brovm, solicitor-general, by Harrison & Peeples, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 S.E. 399, 97 Ga. 194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/usom-v-state-ga-1895.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack