Williams v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Williams v. State

152 S.E. 911, 41 Ga. App. 351, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 582

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 15, 1930

Docket20384

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 152 S.E. 911 (Williams 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.

Bluebook

Williams v. State, 152 S.E. 911, 41 Ga. App. 351, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 582 (Ga. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

The defendant was convicted of possessing intoxicating liquors, and he excepts' to the overruling of his motion for a new trial. The evidence shows that the officers found whisky hidden “inside the enclosure” on the premises occupied by the accused, more whisky “over the wire fence,” and empty bottles and fruit jars that smelled of whisky “just over the fence” that enclosed the defendant’s premises. The trial judge, in overruling the motion for a new trial, which is based on the general grounds only, said: “The jury were satisfied of the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and I myself do not entertain the slightest doubt of his guilt.” The evidence warrants the verdict and the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial is

Affirmed.

Broyles, G. J„ and Bloodworth, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

The defendant was convicted of possessing intoxicating liquors, and he excepts' to the overruling of his motion for a new trial. The evidence shows that the officers found whisky hidden “inside the enclosure” on the premises occupied by the accused, more whisky “over the wire fence,” and empty bottles and fruit jars that smelled of whisky “just over the fence” that enclosed the defendant’s premises. The trial judge, in overruling the motion for a new trial, which is based on the general grounds only, said: “The jury were satisfied of the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and I myself do not entertain the slightest doubt of his guilt.” The evidence warrants the verdict and the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial is

Affirmed.

Broyles, G. J„ and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

152 S.E. 911, 41 Ga. App. 351, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 582, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-state-gactapp-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack