Jones v. State

• Decision Date: 10 January 1928
• Docket Number: 18586.
• Citation: 141 S.E. 216,37 Ga.App. 632
• Parties: JONES v. STATE.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

141 S.E. 216

37 Ga.App. 632

JONES v. STATE.

No. 18586.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, First Division

January 10, 1928

Syllabus by Editorial Staff.

To ascertain whether particular part of charge, excepted to as expressing an opinion on facts, is fairly liable to such exception, the entire charge, written in record, may be considered.

Where general grounds of motion for new trial are not argued or referred to in brief of counsel for plaintiff in error, they are treated as abandoned.

Error from Superior Court, Fulton County; Virlyn B. Moore, Judge.

Louise Jones brings error. Affirmed.

Louis H. Foster, of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.

John A. Boykin, Sol. Gen., and J. W. Le Craw, both of Atlanta, for the State.

Syllabus OPINION.

BROYLES, C.J.

1. "To ascertain whether a particular part of a charge, excepted to as expressing an opinion on the facts, is fairly liable to such exception, the whole charge, written and in the record, may be considered." Nutzel v. State, 60 Ga. 265 (1). Under this ruling and the facts of the instant case, the single ground of the amendment to the motion for a new trial shows no cause for a reversal of the judgment below.

2. The general grounds of the motion for a new trial are not argued or referred to in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, and are treated as abandoned.

Judgment affirmed.

LUKE and BLOODWORTH, JJ., concur.