Case ID: ga-app_33/html/0576-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Bboyles, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

16076.
    Lee v. The State.
    Decided March 4, 1925.
    Indictment lor larceny from house; from Fulton superior court —Judge Howard. October 25, 1924.
    
      Braclcett & Tindall, Branch & Howard, J. IF. LeCraw, for plaintiff in error.
    
      John A. Boylcin, solicitor-general, JS. A. Stephens, Ralph II. Pharr, contra.
   Bboyles, C. J.

The evidence tending to connect the accused with the offense charged was wholly circumstantial, and was not sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of his guilt. The verdict, therefore, was contrary to law and the evidence, and the trial judge erred in refusing to grant a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Luke and Bloodworlh, JJ., concur.