¶1Having been convicted of burglary, the defendant moved for a new trial on the general grounds, and on special grounds which the court certified to be untrue. The burglary was proved to have taken place about ten o’clock at night. The burglar was seen and his hat touched as he disappeared in the darkness. Several circumstances pointed to the defendant as the guilty one, including his size and general appearance, the kind of hat, tracks corresponding with his, and his sayings and behavior before and after the crime was committed. He introduced no evidence, but set up an alibi in his statement, claiming that at the time of the burglary he was in his own house with his wife and children, including a daughter nearly grown.
91 Ga. 188
Smith v. State
Decided February 20, 1893
Supreme Court of Georgia · decided 1893-02-20
<p>Before-Judge Fish. Sumter superior court. November term, 1891.</p>
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Judgment affirmed, · Decided 1893-02-20
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently October 1947
21 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 →