Case ID: ga_68/html/0287-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Crawford, Justice.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Heath vs. The State of Georgia.
    1. The evidence upholds the verdict.
    2. A refusal to grant a continuance to obtain evidence which, when obtained, would be immaterial, is no ground for a new trial.
    3. Though a word in the charge, when taken alone, may be objectionable, yet if when taken with its context it is clear and substantially correct, its use will not necessitate a new trial.
   Crawford, Justice.

(The judge charged that in misdemeanors there are no accessories before the fact as in felonies, but all are equally guilty ; and that every person “concerned" in this transaction is equally guilty. Exception was taken to the use of the word "“concerned.”)