Legal Opinion

King v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 16, 1952No. 34187PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTownsend, J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) Special ground 4 of the amended motion for a new trial contends that the trial court erred in failing to charge without request on the law of circumstantial evidence. The testimony of the State’s witnesses, both as to the defendant’s drunkenness and as to the speed and manner of his driving, was direct, not circumstantial evidence of these facts. Where circumstantial evidence alone is not relied upon, it is not error to fail to charge without request the principles of Code §§ 38-102 and 38-109 relating thereto. Strickland v. State, 167 Ga. 452 (1) (145 S.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Strickland v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1928
  2. Donley v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1945
  3. Goldberg v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1920
  4. Goldberg v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1920

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Meeks v. LunsfordCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
  2. Wells v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964
  3. Bobo v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1960
  4. Lyons v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1954

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API