History
  • No items yet
midpage
Swann v. State
113 S.E. 38
Ga. Ct. App.
1922
Check Treatment

Lead Opinion

Per Curiam.

The evidence authorized the defendant’s conviction. The only special- ground of the motion for a new trial is based upon alleged newly discovered evidence, the material part of which was hearsay and inadmissible; and, moreover, this alleged evidence is not such as would likely cause a different result should a new trial be granted. The court therefore did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

•Judgment affirmed.

Broyles,. C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. Luke, J., dissents. W. L. Nix, for plaintiff in error. W. O. Dean, solicitor-general, contra.





Dissenting Opinion

Luke, J.,

dissenting. The evidence relied upon to convict the defendant being weak and unsatisfactory; and the alleged newly discovered evidence being, in my opinion, admissible and such as would probably produce a different result upon another trial, 1 think that a new trial should be granted.

Case Details

Case Name: Swann v. State
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Date Published: Jul 12, 1922
Citation: 113 S.E. 38
Docket Number: 13601
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.