The verdict was authorized by the evidence; and the alleged newly discovered evidence, being merely cumulative and impeaching in its nature, did not require a new trial. “The discretion of a trial judge in refusing a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence will not be controlled, unless manifestly abused.” Tilley v. Cox, 119 Ga. 867, 872 (47 S. E. 219). Where a motion for a new trial is based upon alleged newly discovered evidence, and affidavits are introduced, sustaining and disputing this ground of the motion, “the trial judge is the trior of the facts, -and it is his province to determine the credibility of the conflicting facts and contradictory witnesses.” Hayes v. State, 16 Ga. App. 334 (85 S. E. 253). Judgment affirmed.
Wright v. State
90 S.E. 285
Ga. Ct. App.1916Check TreatmentAI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.