Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

61 Ga. App. 605

7 S.E.2d 42

Lemming v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 31, 1940

Court of Appeals of Georgia · decided 1940-01-31

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently April 1955

3 state decisions

Relies on Wilburn v. State · Central Railroad & Banking Co. v. Roberts

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1940-01-31

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Guerry, J.

¶1 1. The alleged newly discovered evidence tended only to impeach the State’s witness. There are literally hundreds of decisions which hold that newly discovered evidence which is merely impeaching in its character is not a good ground for a new trial.

¶2 •2. A'juror whose brother married the sister of the prosecutor’s wife did not thereby become related to the prosecutor so as to be disqualified. The brother became related to his wife’s relatives. The juror did not become so related. As was s'aid by Judge Bleckley in Central Railroad & Banking Co. v. Roberts, 91 Ga. 513, 517 (18 S. E. 315):

“The groom and bride each comes within The circle of the other’s kin; But kin and kin are still no more Related than they were before.”

¶3 See also Wilburn v. State, 141 Ga. 510 (2) (81 S. E. 444).

¶4 3. The evidence supported the verdict. The remaining grounds of the motion for new trial are without merit.

¶5 Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.
/61/gaapp/605 · .json · Public domain