Watts v. State, 29 S.E.2d 662 (Ga. Ct. App. 1944). · Go Syfert
Search
Watts v. State, 29 S.E.2d 662 (Ga. Ct. App. 1944). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
17 citation events across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Millhollan v. Watkins Motor Lines, Inc. (gactapp, 1967-10-06)
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Millhollan v. Watkins Motor Lines, Inc.
Ga. Ct. App. · 1967 · confidence medium
“Where a matter is collateral to the real issues, and it comes in question, and proof of it is admissible, it may be shown by parol evidence, and need not be established by documentary evidence.” Hyde v. State, 70 Ga. App. 823, 828 ( 29 SE2d 820 ).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Byrd v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 1949 · confidence medium
Hyde v. State, 70 Ga. App. 823, 828 ( 29 S. E. 2d, 820 ); Streeter v. State, 60 Ga. App. 190, 193 ( 3 S. E. 2d, 235 ).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Glosson v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 1948 · confidence medium
The scope of the cross-examination of a witness is not unlimited, but rests largely within the discretion of the judge.” Hyde v. State, 70 Ga. App. 823, 824 ( 29 S. E. 2d, 820 ).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) James v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 1944 · confidence medium
“Where a matter is collateral to the real issues, and it comes in question, and proof of it is admissible, it may be shown by parol evidence, and need not be established by documentary evidence.” 1 Wharton’s Criminal Evidence, 390, § 154; Hyde v. State, 70 Ga. App. 823, 828 ( 29 S. E. 2d, 820 ).
cited Cited "see" United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Rome Concrete Pipe Co.
Ga. Ct. App. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See National Surety Corp. v. Wright, 70 Ga. App. 838 ( 29 SE2d 662 ) (1944).
cited Cited "see" Hardison v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 1950 · signal: see · confidence high
See, in this connection, Hyde v. State, 70 Ga. App. 823, 827 ( 29 S. E. 2d, 820 ); Aycock v. State, 62 Ga. App. 812, 817 ( 10 S. E. 2d, 84 ).
Watts
v.
the State
30369..
Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Feb 19, 1944.
29 S.E.2d 662
H. A. Allen, Gertrude Harris, for plaintiff in error. Lindley W. Camp, solicitor, John A. Boykin, solicitor-general, Durwood T. Pye, contra.
Broyles, Gardner, MacIntyre.
Published
Gardner, J.

The questions of law and fact in this case are almost identical with those in Day v. State, ante. The opinion in the latter case is controlling on ai' assignments of error in the instant case. Therefore the judge did non eiu in overruling the certiorari for any reason assigned. Judgment affirmed

Broyles, G. J., and MacIntyre, J., oonour.