Case ID: ga-app_41/html/0294-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Beoyi.es, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

20231.
    Barber v. The State.
    Decided March 5, 1930.
    
      J. W. Dennard, for plaintiff in error.
    
      T. Hoyt Davis, solicitor-general, contra.
   Beoyi.es, C. J.

Tlie evidence connecting tlie accused with the arson charged, while circumstantial, was sufficient to establish the corpus delicti and to authorize the jury to find that it excluded every reasonable hypothesis save that of his guilt. The cases cited in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error are distinguished by their particular facts from this ease. The refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Luhe and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.