History
  • No items yet
midpage
Crawford v. State
153 S.E. 92
Ga. Ct. App.
1930
Check Treatment
Broyles, C. J.

1. There is no merit in the grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial. Especially is this true in view of the note of the trial judge qualifying his approval of those grounds. Moreover, if the actions and statement of the court, during the trial of the case and in the presence of the jury, were prejudicial to the accused, in order for this court to pass upon the question a timely motion for a mistrial must have been made and overruled, which was not done.

2. The verdict was authorized by the evidence, and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Lulce and, Bloodioorth, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Crawford v. State
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Date Published: Apr 16, 1930
Citation: 153 S.E. 92
Docket Number: 20393
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.