Davis v. State, 17 S.E. 292 (1893). · Go Syfert
Search
Davis v. State, 17 S.E. 292 (1893). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
AS OF DEC 31, 2011 This case was green based on 46 citation events through that date. View current →
46 citation events as of Dec 31, 2011.
Treatment trajectory · 1900 → 2026 · viewing as of 2011
1900 1963 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. (filtered to citers dated on or before 2011)
cited Cited "see" Henderson v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 1914 · signal: see · confidence high
See Davis v. State, 91 Ga. 167 ; Holzendorff v. DeRenne, 129 Ga. 226 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Gallman v. State (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 1973 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also, Davis v. State, 91 Ga. 167 (2) ( 17 SE 292 ); McVicker v. Conkle, 96 Ga. 584 (3) ( 24 SE 23 ); Suddeth v. State, 112 Ga. 407 (2) ( 37 SE 747 ).
Davis
v.
State
Feb 20, 1893.
17 S.E. 292
Gustin, Guerry & Hall, for plaintiff in error., \W. H. Belton
Jr.

Lee Davis was convicted of receiving stolen car brasses, knowing them to be stolen, of the property of the East Tenn., Va. & Ga. Railway Co. The conviction was on the second count of the indictment; the first count charged him with the larceny of the brasses. Iiis motion for a new trial was overruled. Among the grounds of the motion it was alleged that the court erred in charging the jury thus: “The State offers in evidence the stove in which it claims the metal was melted away from these brasses; offered also testimony as to jack-screw used for the purpose of obtaining the brasses from the car. Consider all that evidence and look into it and see how it connects, if at all, the defendant with the transaction, either in the theft or in receiving the goods after being stolen, if you find they have been stolen.