Gunnells v. State, 34 S.E.2d 654 (Ga. 1945). · Go Syfert
Gunnells v. State, 34 S.E.2d 654 (Ga. 1945). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
25 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Seaton v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (gactapp, 1988-12-05)
Treatment trajectory · 1948 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1948 1987 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Seaton v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 1988 · confidence medium
Haley v. Bailey, 199 Ga. 486, 488 ( 34 SE2d 685 ) (1945).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Risser v. City of Thomasville
Ga. · 1982 · confidence medium
The evil and the remedy involved in proximity laws of the sort before us were identified in Haley v. Bailey, 199 Ga. 486, 490 ( 34 SE2d 685 ) (1945): “Certainly it was that there should be no traffic in liquor within the specified distance, so that teachers and pupils should not be subjected to the evil influences connected with the liquor traffic.” Such concerns as protecting school children from the influences associated with liquor traffic particularly apply to a kindergarten school for young impressionable children who are just learning to read, think and imagine for themselves.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Hawes v. William L. Bonnell Co., Inc.
Ga. Ct. App. · 1967 · confidence medium
Haley v. Bailey, 199 Ga. 486, 490 ( 34 SE2d 685 ).
cited Cited "see" Johnson & Harber Construction Co. v. Bing
Ga. Ct. App. · 1996 · signal: see · confidence high
See Haley v. Bailey, 199 Ga. 486, 488 ( 34 SE2d 685 ).
discussed Cited "see" Newton v. Stembridge
Ga. · 1957 · signal: see · confidence high
See Haley v. Bailey, 199 Ga. 486 ( 34 S. E. 2d 685 ); Robertson v. Temple, 207 Ga. 311 (1) ( 61 S. E. 2d 285 ); Ford Motor Co. v. Abercrombie, 207 Ga. 464 ( 62 S. E. 2d 209 ); and other cases cited in these cases.
Gunnells
v.
the State
15194..
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Jul 3, 1945.
34 S.E.2d 654
D. D. Veal , for plaintiff in error. T. Grady Head, attorney-general, C.S. Baldwin, Solicitor-general , and Maud Saunders , contra.
Duckworth, Bell, Jenkins, Atlcinson, Wyatt.
Cited by 6 opinions  |  Published
Duckworth, Justice.

1. A ground of a motion for new trial will not be considered by the Supreme Court when it is disapproved by the trial judge. Horton v. Smith, 115 Ga. 66 (3) (41 S. E. 253) ; Cox v. Moore, 142 Ga. 487 (6) (83 S. E. 115); Clifton v. State, 187 Ga. 502 (2) (2 S. E. 2d, 102).

2. Special grounds 2- to 6, inclusive, of the motion for new trial, complaining because the trial court failed to act on its own motion and exclude certain designated testimony to which no objection was made, and also complaining because of designated statements of the solicitor-general in his argument to which no objection was made at the trial, present no question upon which a decision by the Supreme Court may be rendered. Gaines v. State, 120 Ga. 137 (2) (47 S. E. 571); Ayoock v. State, 188 Ga. 550, 567 (4 S. E. 2d, 221); Crosby v. Rogers, 197 Ga. 616 (30 S. E. 2d, 248); Davis v. Buie, 197 Ga. 835 (3) (30 S. E. 2d, 861).

3. The verdict finding the defendant guilty of murdering his wife, by shooting her as charged in the indictment, was authorized by the evidence. Testimony of three eyewitnesses, companions of the deceased at the time when the defendant stopped his car and requested her to get in and ride with him, that upon her refusal to do so, saying that he was drinking, he shot and killed her, is uncontradicted except by the defendant’s statement charging her with improper relations with another man and saying that he was with her at the time of the shooting, and that in shooting at this other man in self-defense he unintentionally shot his wife.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, G. J., Jenkins, P. J., Atlcinson, and Wyatt, JJ., concur.