Georgia Court of Appeals, 1926

Kent v. State

Kent v. State
Georgia Court of Appeals · Decided December 14, 1926 · Broyles
36 Ga. App. 209; 136 S.E. 96; 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 873

Kent v. State

Opinion of the Court

Broyles, C. J.

1. The amendment to the motion for a new trial, not having been argued or referred to in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, and the said brief containing no insistence upon all the grounds of the motion for a new trial, is treated as abandoned.

*210Decided December 14, 1926. J. A. Dixon, H. A. Boykin, for plaintiff in error. E. G. Weathers, solicitor, contra.

2. The evidence connecting the accused with the offense charged was wholly circumstantial, but it amply authorized the jury to find that it excluded every reasonable hypothesis except that of his guilt.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke, J., concurs. Bloodworth, J., absent on account of illness.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.