Case ID: ga-app_35/html/0397-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Bboxles, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

17269.
    Beaver v. The State.
    Criminal Law, 16 C. J. p. 930, n. 93; 17 C. J. p. 271, n. 41.
    Decided May 12, 1926.
    Conviction of driving automobile unlawfully; from Catoosa superior court—Judge Tarver. February 20, 1926.
    
      Joseph M. Lang, for plaintiff in error.
    
      C. G. Pittman, solicitor-general, contra.
   Bboxles, C. J.

The verdict was authorized by the evidence. There was an acute conflict between the evidence for the State and the evidence for the accused, but the jury, as they had a right to do, evidently believed the witnesses for the State and discredited the testimony of the witnesses for the defense. The grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial show no cause for a reversal of the judgment below overruling the motion.

Judgment affirmed.

Lulce and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.