Claughton v. State

• Decision Date: 11 July 1934
• Docket Number: 10221,10222.
• Citation: 175 S.E. 470,179 Ga. 157
• Parties: CLAUGHTON v. STATE (two cases).
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

175 S.E. 470

179 Ga. 157

CLAUGHTON v. STATE (two cases).

Nos. 10221, 10222.

Supreme Court of Georgia

July 11, 1934

Syllabus by Editorial Staff.

Motion to set aside verdict and judgment is not appropriate remedy in criminal case.

Motion for new trial is available remedy to accused for setting aside verdict, but is fatally defective where no brief of evidence is approved, filed, and made part of record (Civ. Code 1910, §§ 6089, 6306).

Error from Superior Court, Fulton County; E. D. Thomas, Judge.

E. N. Claughton brings error to review judgments of conviction in two cases.

Affirmed.

Frank A. Bowers, of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.

John A. Boykin, Sol. Gen., J. Walter Le Craw, and John H. Hudson, all of Atlanta, for the State.

Syllabus OPINION.

GILBERT, Justice.

1. A motion to set aside a verdict and judgment is not an appropriate remedy in a criminal case. McDonald v. State, 126 Ga. 536, 55 S.E. 235; Brown v. State, 150 Ga. 585, 104 S.E. 428; Hughes v. State, 159 Ga. 818 (5), 127 S.E. 109; Gravitt v. State, 165 Ga. 779 (3), 142 S.E. 100.

2. A motion for new trial is an available remedy to the defendant for setting aside the verdict in a criminal case. The motions in these cases cannot be construed as motions for new trials; but if such construction were possible, the motions would be fatally defective for the reason that no brief of evidence was approved, filed, and made part of the record. Civil Code 1910, §§ 6089, 6306.

3. The court did not err in overruling the motions.

Judgments affirmed.

All the Justices concur.