Court Opinion

ID: 5616190
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-11 04:18:38.13647+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:37:15.518992
License: Public Domain

Broyles, C. J.
1. The exclusion of certain love letters that the female alleged to have been seduced by the defendant wrote to á third person after the alleged seduction was not error. See, in this connection, Keller v. State, 102 Ga. 506 (7) (31 S. E. 92); Davis v. State, 31 Ga. App. 523 (3) (121 S. E. 136).
*356Decided May 14, 1924.
I. L. Oakes, 0. A. Nix, for plaintiff in error.
Pemberton Cooley, solicitor-general, Kelley & Kelley, contra.
2. The verdict was authorized by the evidence and the overruling of the motion for a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke cmd Bloodworth, JJ., concur.