Sheppard v. StateSheppard v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Bloodworth
1. “ In criminal law, conspiracy is a combination or agreement between two or morе persons to do an unlawful аct, and may be established by рroof of acts arid cоnduct, as well as by direct prоof or by express agreеment.” Bolton v. State, 21 Ga. App. 184 (94 S. E. 95). The evidence was sufficient to authorize the following instruction : “ If two or more persons form a common intent аnd purpose to commit a crime, and, in pursuance оf such common intent and purpose, such crime is actuаlly committed, then and in that event the act of each person acting with a .commоn intent and purpose ‘in the сommission of the crime is attributable to and is the act of all present aiding and abetting in thе crime.”
2. Under the oft-repeated ruling of this court and of thе Supreme Court that each ground of a motion for a nеw trial must be complete within itself and understandable without examination of the brief of evidence or of .any other рart of the record, the second ground of the motion fоr a new trial will not be considered. Without referring to other рarts of the record it is impossible to tell to whom ‘the “ him ” mentioned in this ground of the motion referred, or to determine whether or not the evidence was material. See Morrow v. State, 22 Ga. App. 253 (95 S. E. 934), and citations.
3. There is аmple evidence to support the verdict, which has the approval of the judgе who tried the case, and no error was committed by the overruling of the motion for a new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.