Washington v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Washington v. State

99 S.E. 118, 149 Ga. 34, 1919 Ga. LEXIS 103

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 15, 1919

DocketNo. 1143

StatusPublished

This text of 99 S.E. 118 (Washington 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

Washington v. State, 99 S.E. 118, 149 Ga. 34, 1919 Ga. LEXIS 103 (Ga. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

1. When considered in connection with other portions of the charge, an. instruction in a case dependent for conviction entirely upon circumstantial evidence, that “If you are satisfied of the defendant’s guilt the form of your verdict would be, ‘We, the jury, find the defendant guilty,’ ” was not erroneous on the ground that it did not state more specifically that before the jury would be authorized to convict the defendant they must be convinced of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the evidence must be such as to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis than that of the defendant’s guilt.

2. The evidence was sufficient to authorize the verdict finding the defendant guilty, and there was no error in refusing a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Atkinson, J.

1. When considered in connection with other portions of the charge, an. instruction in a case dependent for conviction entirely upon circumstantial evidence, that “If you are satisfied of the defendant’s guilt the form of your verdict would be, ‘We, the jury, find the defendant guilty,’ ” was not erroneous on the ground that it did not state more specifically that before the jury would be authorized to convict the defendant they must be convinced of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the evidence must be such as to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis than that of the defendant’s guilt.

2. The evidence was sufficient to authorize the verdict finding the defendant guilty, and there was no error in refusing a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 S.E. 118, 149 Ga. 34, 1919 Ga. LEXIS 103, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/washington-v-state-ga-1919.