Hayes v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Accusation of malicious mischief; from city court of Hazleburst —Judge Grant. February 16, 1915.
1Opinion of the CourtWade, J.
1. The discretion of a trial judge in refusing a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence will not be controlled unless manifestly abused. Tilley v. Cox, 119 Ga. 867, 872 (47 S. E. 219). Where a motion for a new trial is based upon alleged newly discovered evidence, and affidavits are introduced, sustaining and disputing this ground of the motion, “the trial judge is the trior of the facts, and it is his province to determine the credibility of the conflicting facts and contradictory witnesses. A reviewing court will not in any such case control his discretion as to the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Fouraker v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
- Clark v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Tilley v. CoxSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
- Jordan v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
3Cited by21 opinions
- McKenzie v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1921
- Salter v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1928
- Champion v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1918
- Norwood v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1922
- Williams v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1925
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.