Case Name: Brice v. The State
Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1925-03-27
Citations: 33 Ga. App. 602
Docket Number: 16208
Parties: Brice v. The State.
Judges: Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., eoneur.
Reporter: Georgia Appeals Reports
Volume: 33
Pages: 602–602

Head Matter:
16208.
Brice v. The State.
Decided March 27, 1925.
Rehearing denied April 15, 1925.
Indictment for unlawful shooting; from Fulton superior court— Judge Howard. December 6, 1924.
W. E. Terrell, for plaintiff in error.
John A. Boykin, solicitor-general, John E. Hudson, Ralph E. Pharr, contra.

Opinion:
Broyles, C. J.
1. A motion for a new trial based upon alleged newly discovered evidence -is fatally defective unless accompanied by an affidavit of counsel for tbe movant that he "did not know of the existence of such evidence before the trial, and that the same could not have been discovered by the exercise of ordinary diligence." Civil Code (1910), § 6086. This ruling disposes of the amendment to the motion for a new trial.
2. The general grounds of the motion for a new trial, not having been argued or insisted upon in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, are treated as abandoned.
Judgment affirmed.
Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., eoneur.