Case ID: ga-app_35/html/0487-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Luke, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

17301.
    GODWIN v. THE STATE.
    The evidence authorized the verdict; and the newly discovered evidence did not require the grant of a new trial.
    Criminal Law, 17 C. J. p. 248, n. 3.
    Decided June 15, 1926.
    Possessing intoxicating liquor; from Floyd superior court-judge Maddox. March 20, 1926.
    
      Porter & Mebane, for plaintiff in error.
    
      James F. Kelly, solicitor-general, contra.
   Luke, J.

Will Godwin was convicted of violating the prohibition statute. As conceded by his counsel, the evidence authorized his conviction. The special ground of the motion for a new trial upon the ground of newly discovered evidence, in our opinion,, as ■ shown by the record, does not warrant a reversal of the judgment of the court overruling and denying the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles/ C. J., and Bloodioorth, J., concur.