Montgomery v. State

40 Ga. App. 507 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1929

Bloodworth, J.

1. The 4th and 5th grounds of the motion for a new trial are not approved by the trial judge.

2. “Objection that a sentence imposed in a criminal ease is for any reason illegal or irregular can not be made the ground of a motion for a new trial.” Martin v. City of Rome, 15 Ga. App. 496 (83 S. E. 872); Hill v. State, 122 Ga. 166 (2) (50 S. E. 57); Sturkey v. State, 116 Ga. 526 (42 S. E. 747); Bellinger v. State, 116 Ga. 545 (2) (42 S. E. 747); Burgamy v. State, 114 Ga. 852 (2) (40 S. E. 991).

(a) “Matters relating to the form or substance of the sentence can not legally be made grounds for a new trial. If the sentence is for any reason erroneous, the error can be corrected only by direct exception/' Daniel v. State, 6 Ga. App. 164 (3) (64 S. E. 574).

3. There is sufficient evidence to support the verdict, which was approved by the judge who tried the case, and he committed no error in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Decided November 12, 1929. Orrin Bober Is, for plaintiff in error. Clifford Frail, solicitor-general, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.