History
  • No items yet
midpage
Ingram v. State
24 Ga. App. 332
Ga. Ct. App.
1919
Check Treatment
Bloodworth, J.

1. (a) “A ground of a motion for a new trial which complains of the admission of specified testimony must state the name of the witness whose testimony is complained of.” Adams v. State, 22 Ga. App. 252 (95 S. E. 877), and cases cited.

(5) “Under repeated rulings of this court and of the Supreme Court, a ground of a motion for a new trial must be complete in itself. When it is so incomplete as to require this court to refer to the pleadings or to the brief of evidence, it will not be considered.” Cæsar v. State, 22 Ga. App. 796 (97 S. E. 255), and cases cited.

(c) “It is only where a case is wholly dependent upon the law of circumstantial evidence that the trial judge is required to give *333the law of circumstantial evidence.” Williamson v. State, 22 Ga. App. 787 (97 S. E. 195), and cases cited.

2. The foregoing rulings dispose of the Special grounds of the motion for a new trial. The evidence is sufficient to support the verdict, which has the approval of the trial judge, and, no error of law appearing, the judgment is

Affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and Luke,- J., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Ingram v. State
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Date Published: Nov 4, 1919
Citation: 24 Ga. App. 332
Docket Number: 10730
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.