Legal Opinion

Paceley v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided November 4, 1919No. 10825Published

, Indictment for manufacture of intoxicating liquor; from Dooly superior court—Judge Gower. July 19, 1919.

1Opinion of the CourtBloodworth, J.

1. “Under repeated rulings of this court and of the Supreme Court, a ground of a motion for a new trial must be complete in itself. When it is so incomplete as to require this court to refer to the pleadings or to the brief of evidence, it will not be considered. Bridges v. Griffin, 20 Ga. App. 598 (2), 599 (93 S. E. 170). See also Copeland v. Ruff, 20 Ga. App. 217 (2) (92 S. E. 955); Head v. State, 144 Ga. 383 (87 S. E. 273); Smiley v. Smiley, 144 Ga. 546 (2) (87 S. E. 668).” Cæsar v. State, 22 Ga. App. 796 (97 S. E. 255). Under the rulings in the cases cited, neither of the two special…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Smiley v. SmileySupreme Court of Georgia · 1916
  2. Copeland v. RuffCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
  3. Head v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1915
  4. Cæsar v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1918
  5. Bridges v. GriffinCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917

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

Powered by the Exa API