Rogers v. StateRogers v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Bkotles
Bkotles, C. J.
*628Decided January 10, 1928.
W. N. Oliver, for plaintiff in- error.
Robert McMillan, solicitor-general, contra.
“Dеclarations oí a witness аfter triаl, at varianсe with his swоrn testimоny, evеn when mаde undеr oath and explicity assorting that his testimony оn the trial was fаlse, do not constitute a cause for а new triаl.” Smarr v. Kerlin, 21 Ga. App. 813 (2) (95 S. E. 306), and cit. A fortiori, such declarations are not causе for а new trial on an extraordinary motion therеfor, suсh motions not being favored by the courts. Under the above-stated rulings and the facts of the
instant case, the overruling of the extraordinary motion for a new trial was-not error. Judgment affirmed.
Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., eonour.