Legal Opinion

McDow v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided March 20, 1933No. 9214PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBussell, C. J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.)

It appears from a careful examination that the evidence in behalf of the State warranted the verdict. The three general grounds of the motion for new trial are not argued in the brief of counsel. Thus it is conceded that the evidence would be sufficient to convict, but for the errors of which complaint is made.

The first special ground of the motion complains that the court erred in refusing a change of venue, and, in so ruling, making remarks which, it is contended, were extremely improper and prejudicial to the accused. In the exercise of his discretion…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Keener v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1855
  2. Warrick v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
  3. Everett v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1878
  4. Hixon v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
  5. Harris v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Lively v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
  2. Roth v. . News Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  3. Rooker v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1955
  4. Roth v. Greensboro News Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  5. Quillian v. TuckCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1941

2 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