Hays v. State
| Decision Date | 18 February 1915 |
| Docket Number | (No. 5716.) |
| Citation | Hays v. State, 16 Ga.App. 20, 84 S.E. 497 (Ga. App. 1915) |
| Parties | HAYS. v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from Superior Court, Chattooga County; Moses Wright, Judge.
Will Hays was convicted of crime, and brings error.Affirmed.
See, also, 83 S. E. 502.
Wesley Shropshire, of Summerville, for plaintiff in error.
W. B. Shaw, of La Fayette, and W. H. Ennis, Sol.Gen., of Borne, for the State.
BROYLES, J., not presiding.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
3 cases
-
Birge v. State
...was the opinion testimony of a statistician. The trial court, as trier of fact, was free to reject this expert testimony. Hays v. State, 16 Ga.App. 20(5), 84 S.E. 497; Ford Motor Co. v. Hanley, 128 Ga.App. 311, 315(2), 196 S.E.2d 454. This enumeration of error is without 2. When the investi......
-
Tate v. State
...on the ground that so doing would tend to criminate himself, all of his evidence ought to have been ruled out. See Hays v. State, 16 Ga. App. 21 (4), 84 S. E. 497. However, no motion to rule out the evidence elicited on direct examination was made. 6. There is no error in the excerpt from t......
-
Terrell v. State
...abuse his discretion in denying the defendant's request to postpone or continue the case after a mistrial. Code § 81-1419; Hays v. State, 16 Ga.App. 20(2), 84 S.E. 497. 2. Although there were discrepancies in the testimony, the evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict and judgment ent......