Hampton v. State

Georgia Court of Appeals December 16, 1925

Hampton v. State, 34 Ga. App. 699 (1925)

131 S.E. 688; 1925 Ga. App. LEXIS 506

Bloodworth

Opinion of the Court

Bloodworth, J.

In each of these cases the conviction was dependent upon circumstantial evidence. In neither of them was the evidence sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis save that of the guilt j>i the accused. The refusal to grant a new trial was error.

Judgments reversed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur. M. C. Few, for plaintiff in error. Joseph B. Dulce, solicitor-general, contra.

Reference

Full Case Name: Hampton v. The State (two cases)
Cited By: 3 cases
Status: Published