Scott v. State, 43 S.E. 425 (Ga. 1903). · Go Syfert
Search
Scott v. State, 43 S.E. 425 (Ga. 1903). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
8 citation events across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Bryan v. Jones (ga, 1910-02-18)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer.
discussed Cited "see" Bryan v. Jones
Ga. · 1910 · signal: see · confidence high
See Scott v. State, 117 Ga. 14 ( 43 S. E. 425 ) ; Clark v. State, 117 Ga. 254 (5), ( 43 S. E. 853 ) ; Green v. State, 118 Ga. 755 ( 45 S. E. 598 ) ; Steed v. State, 123 Ga. 569 (3), ( 51 S. E. 627 ) ; Sasser v. State, 129 Ga. 541 (8), ( 59 S. E. 255 ) ; Mallary v. Moon, 130 Ga. 591 (2), ( 62 S. E. 401 ) ; Summerlin v. State, 130 Ga. 791 -796 (6), ( 61 S. E. 849 ) ; Pierce v. State, 132 Ga. 27 (2), ( 63 S. E. 792 ) ; Scott v. State, 132 Ga. 357 (2), ( 64 S. E. 272 ).
Scott
v.
State
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Feb 6, 1903.
43 S.E. 425
Cruger Westbrook, for plaintiff in error., John B. Pope, solicitor, contra.
Fish.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
Fish, J.

1. A ground of a motion for a new trial assigning error in the admission of evidence must, to entitle it to consideration, itself show, literally or in substance, what the evidence in question was.

2. Failure to instruct the jury as to the relative value of positive and negative-testimony is not cause for a new trial, in the absence of a proper request to-charge upon that subject.

8. The evidence warranted the verdict, and there was no error in refusing a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

By jive Justices.