Case ID: ga-app_35/html/0662-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Bloodwoetii, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

17471.
    Willis v. The State.
    Criminal Law, 16 C. J. p. 1059, n. 39; p. 1180, n. 74; 17 O. J. p. 233, n. 83.
    Decided August 4, 1926.
    Assault and battery; from Schley superior court—Judge Little-john. May 17, 1926.
    
      J. F. Earl, J. A. Eixon, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Jule Felton, solicitor-general, contra.
   Bloodwoetii, J.

1. The discretion of the court was not abused when the motion to continue was overruled.

2. The defendant’s conviction was not dependent entirely upon circumstantial evidence. The trial judge did not err, in the absence of a proper written request, in omitting to charge on circumstantial evidence.

3. There is no merit in either of the other two special grounds of the motion for a new trial.

4. There was ample evidence to support the verdict, and the motion for a now trial was properly overruled.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.