Muse v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Accusation of possession of intoxicating liquor; from city court of Valdosta—Judge Cranford. August 8. 1919. The only testimony at the trial was that of the sheriff, H. M. Passmore.
Read the full summary
Accusation of possession of intoxicating liquor; from city court of Valdosta—Judge Cranford. August 8. 1919. The only testimony at the trial was that of the sheriff, H. M. Passmore. He testified that he searched the house of Chicken Muse, the defendant, and found there a locked trunk, which he asked the defendant to open; that the defendant “took his keys out” and unlocked the trunk, and nearly six pints of whisky and about two thirds of a bottle of “shine” were found in it; that the only statement that the defendant made about the liquor 'was that “a fellow left it there;” he was asked but…
1Opinion of the CourtBloodworth, J.
1. “Under repeated rulings of this court and of the Supreme Court, a ground of a motion for a new trial complaining of the admission of testimony must be complete within itself, and not such as to require the reviewing court to refer to the brief of evidence or other parts of the record in order to determine the question of the admissibility of the testimony. A ground of a motion for a new trial which complains of the admission of certain specified testimony upon the trial of the case must state the name of the witness whose- testimony is complained of.” Peeples v. Butler, 21 Ga. App. 310 (94…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Peeples & Shepherd v. Butler, Stevens & BellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
3Cited by1 opinion
- Coggins v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1940