Davis v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Indictment for robbery; from Spalding superior court—Judge Searcy. March 16, 1918. The ground referred to in .paragraph 1 of the decision is as follows: “Because movant contends the verdict of the jury did not speak the sentiment and conviction of the entire jury, because the jury was dismissed for a while by the court after the reading of the verdict, before the defendant’s counsel had an opportunity to poll the jury.”
Read the full summary
Indictment for robbery; from Spalding superior court—Judge Searcy. March 16, 1918. The ground referred to in .paragraph 1 of the decision is as follows: “Because movant contends the verdict of the jury did not speak the sentiment and conviction of the entire jury, because the jury was dismissed for a while by the court after the reading of the verdict, before the defendant’s counsel had an opportunity to poll the jury.” The trial judge’s note as to this ground is as follows: “No request was made at the time the verdict was returned, or at any time, to poll the jury; counsel for defendants…
1Opinion of the CourtHarwell, J.
1. In the light of the qualifying note of the trial judge no merit appears in the ground of the motion for a new trial relating to the polling ofs the jury.
2. The 3d special ground of the motion for a new trial is incomplete. It is as follows: “Because, movant contends, the second charge by the court, without request by the jury, after the judge had ordered the jury brought into the court-room and asked in open court if there was a question of law or fact that prevented the jury, from arriving at a verdict, and because tile judge asked the jury how they stood in numbers, and being -told by…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dalton Fruit & Produce Co. v. PuryearCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1918
3Cited by2 opinions
- Webb v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1928
- Hammond v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1928