Case ID: ga-app_32/html/0330-02.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

15417.
    Crowley v. The State.
    Decided May 13, 1924.
   Luke, J.

1- A conviction of larceny was authorized by the evidence.

2. The seven grounds of the motion for a new trial, as to the exclusion of evidence, the alleged insufficiency of evidence, and alleged error in excerpts from the charge of the court, are without substantial merit. The defendant has had a legal trial, and for no reason pointed out did the court err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affi/rmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworlh, J., concur.

Indictment for larceny from house; from Lowndes superior court ■ — -Judge Dickerson presiding. February 16, 1924.

II. B. Edwards, Hendricks & Hendricks, for plaintiff in error. ~

G. E. Hay, solicitor-general, Eva L. Hay, contra.