Wood v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Wood v. State

118 S.E. 763, 30 Ga. App. 665, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 607

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 25, 1923

Docket14712

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 118 S.E. 763 (Wood 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

Wood v. State, 118 S.E. 763, 30 Ga. App. 665, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 607 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, O. J.

1. Where A, B, and C, acting independently and without concert of action, shoot at D, and the latter is killed, and where A and B are tried under an indictment for the murder of D, and where the evidence does not demand a finding that the deceased was shot and killed by A and B, or by either of them, a verdict finding them guilty of shooting at another is not contrary to law, provided the offense of shooting at another is sufficiently charged in the indictment. This ruling is not contrary to the decision in Fontana v. State, 152 Ga. 422 (107 S. E. 254).

2. The excerpts from the charge of the court, complained of in the motion for a new trial, are not error for any reason assigned.

3. The verdict was authorized by the evidence, and the overruling of the motion for a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, O. J.

1. Where A, B, and C, acting independently and without concert of action, shoot at D, and the latter is killed, and where A and B are tried under an indictment for the murder of D, and where the evidence does not demand a finding that the deceased was shot and killed by A and B, or by either of them, a verdict finding them guilty of shooting at another is not contrary to law, provided the offense of shooting at another is sufficiently charged in the indictment. This ruling is not contrary to the decision in Fontana v. State, 152 Ga. 422 (107 S. E. 254).

2. The excerpts from the charge of the court, complained of in the motion for a new trial, are not error for any reason assigned.

3. The verdict was authorized by the evidence, and the overruling of the motion for a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 S.E. 763, 30 Ga. App. 665, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 607, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wood-v-state-gactapp-1923.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack