Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

44 Ga. App. 798

Minshew v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 17, 1932

Court of Appeals of Georgia · decided 1932-02-17

Decided 1932-02-17

Broyles, C. J.

¶11. Under tlie facts of the case the exclusion of the testimony set forth in special ground 1 of the motion for a new trial, even if error, does not require a reversal of the judgment.

¶22. The excerpt from the charge of the court, complained of in special ground 2 of the motion for a new trial, when considered in the light of the remainder of the charge, is not erroneous for any reason assigned.

*799Decided February 17, 1932.McDonald & McDonald, for plaintiff in error.T. Hoyt Davis, solicitor-general, contra.

¶33. The remaining special grounds of the motion for a new trial and the general grounds of the motion are not insisted upon in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error; and therefore are treated as abandoned.

¶4Judgment affirmed.

Lulce, J., concurs. Bloodworth, J., absent on account of illness.
/44/gaapp/798 · .json · Public domain