Young v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Accusation of sale of liquor; from city court of Ocilla—Judge Oxford. November 6, 1912.
1Opinion of the CourtHill, C. J.
1. It is only in those cases where the State relies entirely upon circumstantial evidence that it is incumbent upon the trial judge, without request, to instruct the jury as to the probative value of circumstantial evidence. Holt v. State, 7 Ga. App. 77 (66 S. E. 279); Benton v. State, 9 Ga. App. 422 (71 S. E. 498). The verdict in this case does not depend entirely upon such evidence.
2. The evidence obtained by an, illegal search of the house of the accused - is admissible against him. This has been repeatedly held by this court and the Supreme Court. Cohen v. State, 7 Ga. App. 5 (65 S. E.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
- Duren v. City of ThomasvilleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
- Cohen v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1909
- Hammock v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
- Holt v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1909
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Knight v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1919
- Hammock v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1926