Case ID: ga-app_34/html/0235-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Bloodworth, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

16601.
    Ray v. The State.
   Bloodworth, J.

1. There is nothing in any of the special grounds of the motion for a new trial that requires a rehearing of this ease.

Decided July 29, 1925.

Indictment for possessing liquor apparatus; from Haralson superior court—Judge Irwin. April 28, 1925.

Smith & Watson, for plaintiff in error.

E. S. Griffith, solicitor-general, contra.

2. There is some evidence to support the verdict.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Lulce, J., concur.