History
  • No items yet
midpage
Ivey v. State
27 Ga. App. 777
Ga. Ct. App.
1921
Check Treatment
Broyles, C. J.

The evidence relied upon to convict the accused was wholly circumstantial, and was insufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of his guilt.

Judgment reversed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. The motion for a new trial was based-on the usual general .grounds. The judge’s order overruling the motion is as follows: “ The within motion for new trial is overruled. I do this to prevent expense in another trial. The evidence, in my judgment, is barely sufficient to sustain the verdict, if sufficient, and I prefer that the Court of Appeals adjudicate the question of law, in the light of the facts, so as to prevent further trial, should a new trial be granted. E. P. Davis, J. Cecil Davis, for plaintiff in error,

cited: 6 Ga. App. 105; Id. 776; 118 Ga. 320; Id. 66; 111 Ga. 140.

M. L. Felts, solicitor-general, contra.

Case Details

Case Name: Ivey v. State
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Date Published: Dec 13, 1921
Citation: 27 Ga. App. 777
Docket Number: 12960
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.