Whitsett v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Whitsett v. State

41 S.E. 699, 115 Ga. 203, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 352

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMarch 26, 1902

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 41 S.E. 699 (Whitsett 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

Whitsett v. State, 41 S.E. 699, 115 Ga. 203, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 352 (Ga. 1902).

Pincite

Opinion

Eish, J.

1. A charge, in a trial for assault with intent to murder, in the following words: “ All the ingredients of murder, except the death of the party, must be present at the time the party is injured. If death had resulted from the wound inflicted in this case, it would have been a case of murder, then the case on trial before you would be a case of assault with intent to murder,” is not open to the criticism that it amounts to an expression of opinion that the case on trial is actually one of assault with intent to murder, when, taking the language thus used in connection with the entire charge, it is clear that the judge did not mean to convey any such impression to the jury, and that they could not possibly have understood that he intended so to do.

2. The evidence, though decidedly conflicting, was sufficient to warrant the verdict, and there was no error in refusing to grant a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring, except Little and Lewis, JJ., absent.

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

Eish, J.

1. A charge, in a trial for assault with intent to murder, in the following words: “ All the ingredients of murder, except the death of the party, must be present at the time the party is injured. If death had resulted from the wound inflicted in this case, it would have been a case of murder, then the case on trial before you would be a case of assault with intent to murder,” is not open to the criticism that it amounts to an expression of opinion that the case on trial is actually one of assault with intent to murder, when, taking the language thus used in connection with the entire charge, it is clear that the judge did not mean to convey any such impression to the jury, and that they could not possibly have understood that he intended so to do.

2. The evidence, though decidedly conflicting, was sufficient to warrant the verdict, and there was no error in refusing to grant a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring, except Little and Lewis, JJ., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 S.E. 699, 115 Ga. 203, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 352, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whitsett-v-state-ga-1902.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack