History
  • No items yet
midpage
Cranford v. State
15 Ga. App. 15
| Ga. Ct. App. | 1914
|
Check Treatment
Russell, C. J.

1. To warrant a conviction on circumstantial evidence, the proved facts must not only be consistent with the hypothesis of guilt, but must exclude every other reasonable hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused. Penal Code, § 1010. The evidence against the accused was entirely circumstantial, and, while it may raise a suspicion of . his guilt, was wholly insufficient (even though viewed in the light most adverse to him) to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis than that of his guilt. It was therefore error to refuse a new trial.

2. The decision of this court being controlled. by the conclusion that the evidence was wholly insufficient to authorize a conviction, it would be profitless to consider assignments of error as to the charge of the court and rulings at the trial. Judgment reversed.

Roan, J.,- absent.

Case Details

Case Name: Cranford v. State
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Date Published: Jul 21, 1914
Citation: 15 Ga. App. 15
Docket Number: 5711
Court Abbreviation: Ga. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.