Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

34 Ga. App. 783

Daniel v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 12, 1926

Court of Appeals of Georgia · decided 1926-01-12

Relies on Harrison v. State

Decided 1926-01-12

Broyles, O. J.

¶11. Alleged prejudicial remarks of the judge, during the trial of a ease, in the presence and hearing of the jury, are not ground for a new trial, unless a motion .to declare a mistrial on that ground was made and overruled. Harrison v. State, 20 Ga. App. 157 (6) (92 S. E. 970). Under this ruling and the facts of the instant case, ground 5 of the amendment to the motion for a new trial is without merit.

¶22. The remaining special grounds of the motion for a new trial show no cause for a new trial, and the verdict is amply authorized by the evidence.

¶3Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.B. T. Brocle, J. M. Lang, for plaintiff in error.G. G. Pittman, solicitor-general, contra.
/34/gaapp/783 · .json · Public domain