Legal Opinion

Forth v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided July 14, 1925No. 16457Published

1Opinion of the CourtBloodworth, J.

1. A ground of the motion for a new trial is based upon alleged irregularities in the drawing of the jury for the term at which the accused was tried, of which neither the defendant nor his counsel knew until after conviction. The record shows that thirty-six jurors were drawn from the box, that, after twenty-eight had been regularly and legally drawn, the judge, in *189order that jurors might be obtained who were qualified to try certain cases of long standing on the docket, drew the remaining eight jurors with reference to these cases, and when a juror’s name was taken from the box, if it was…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Governor v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
  2. Worley v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1918

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

Powered by the Exa API