¶1concurring specially. I concur in the judgment and in all of the rulings in the several divisions of the opinion and headnotes, except that in my opinion the practical exclusion from the consideration of the jury of the effect of the evidence of alibi to engender a reasonable doubt, even if it were not sustained as required by law to the reasonable satisfaction of the jury, would also have required the grant of a new trial. Also the exception contained in the seventh ground, with reference to the method of presenting the law of the defendant’s statement to the jury, is, in my opinion, sustained upon every assignment of error presented thereto; and the court should have charged as set out in the eighth division of the opinion, with relation to the proper consideration of the circumstantial evidence in this case.
163 Ga. 313
King v. State
Decided December 15, 1926
Supreme Court of Georgia · decided 1926-12-15
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1926-12-15
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently January 1994
10 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →