Weems v. State
This text of 11 S.E. 501 (Weems 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.
Opinion
The plaintiff in error was indicted and found guilty of the offence of fornication and adultery. A motion for a new trial was made upon the ground that the verdict of the jury was contrary to evidence, without evidence to support it, and contrary to law. The court refused to grant the motion for a new trial, and this judgment is excepted to, and the plaintiff in error here says that the same was error.
We are of the opinion that the evidence in the case affords strong presumption against the defendant in the court below. Yet we do not think it sufficiently strong as to exclude from the minds of the jury every other reasonable hypothesis as to the defendant’s guilt. We do not think the State made such a case under this rule of evidence as to authorize the conviction of the plain tiff in error. Hence, we think the court committed error in refusing to grant a new trial.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
11 S.E. 501, 84 Ga. 461, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weems-v-state-ga-1890.