Legal Opinion

Domingo v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided June 15, 1955No. 18941PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Almand, Justice.

The first ground of the amended motion complains that the court erred in refusing to grant the defendant’s motion for a continuance. It is alleged in this ground that defendant’s counsel had been appointed about two and one-half *695weeks before the trial, and that they had been unable “to prepare an adequate defense for the movant due to the insufficient amount of time.” The record does not disclose any facts or reasons why counsel had been unable to prepare an adequate defense, nor show what witnesses or evidence they would have been enabled to present on the trial in support of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Hyde v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1943
  2. Golatt v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
  3. Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1924
  4. Lucas v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1916
  5. McLendon v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1949

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Pulliam v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1976
  2. Byrd v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1992
  3. Riggins v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1970
  4. Mayfield v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2003
  5. Domingo v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1957

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API