43 Ga. App. 94

21113.

Findley v. The State.

Broyles, C, J.

1. Under repeated rulings of the Supreme Court and of this court, the overruling of a demurrer to an indictment can not be excepted to in a motion for a new trial. There must be a direct exception in the bill of exceptions. This ruling disposes of the amendment to the motion for a new trial.

2. The jury were authorized to find from all the facts and circumstances of the case that the accused, at the time he obtained the money from the *95prosecutor, had formed the intent to cheat and swindle the prosecutor, and that such intent was carried out. The verdict was amply authorized by the evidence, and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Decided March 31, 1931.

TF. E. Lasseler, for plaintiff in- error.

T. Eoyl Davis, solicitor-general, contra.

Judgment affirmed. Luke <md Bloodworth, JJ., coticur.

Findley v. State
43 Ga. App. 94

Case Details

Name
Findley v. State
Decision Date
Mar 31, 1931
Citations

43 Ga. App. 94

Jurisdiction
Georgia

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!