Hays v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Indictment for seduction; from Chattooga superior court — Judge Wright. April 21, 1914.
1Opinion of the CourtKussele, C. J.
1. The court did not err in refusing to continue the case upon the showing that the absent witness was in the State of Tennessee, and therefore not subject to the processes of the court.
2. The fact that members of a jury who had been previously empanelled to try the accused upon the same indictment (the hearing, however, resulting in a mistrial) commingled for two days with the jurors in attendance upon the court and from whom the jury to try the case were to be selected, afforded no ground for a continuance, especially since it was not made to appear to the court that the probable jurors…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- McElhannon v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1896
- Cribb v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Young v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1880
- Glover v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1914
- Pinkard v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1860
3Cited by17 opinions
- Smith v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1969
- Ford Motor Company v. HanleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1973
- Kinney v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1998
- Hansberger Motor Transportation Co. v. PateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
- Birge v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.