Laffitte v. State

Decision Date12 October 1898
Citation105 Ga. 595,31 S.E. 540
PartiesLAFFITTE. v. STATE.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Criminal Law—Appeal—New Trial—Evidence.

1. Points made in a record, but not argued In this court by brief or otherwise, will be regarded as having been abandoned.

2. There being positive evidence to show the guilt of the accused, the verdict against him was warranted.

3. The superior court has, on certiorari, no power to grant a new trial in an interior judicatory on the ground of alleged newly-discovered evidence.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from superior court, Screven county; R. L. Gamble, Judge.

Charles Lattitte, convicted of misdemeanor, brought certiorari, and from a judgment of the superior court brings error. Affirmed.

J. W. Overstreet, for plaintiff in error.

B. T. Rawlings, Sol. Gen., for the State.

LUMPKIN, P. J. The main purpose for which arguments are had before this tribunal is to call its attention to the points insisted upon and the authorities relied on in support of the positions taken by counsel. Our thirteenth rule declares that briefs must "be confined to a statement of the points insisted upon and a citation of authorities." Civ. Code, § 5612. This court is certainly not called upon to deal with or decide any question to which no allusion is made by the counsel who brings here a case for review. It has been frequently held that points presented in a record, but not argued In this court, orally or by brief, will not be considered. See Parker v. Lanier, 82 Ga. 219, 8 S. E. 57; Brown v. State, 82 Ga. 224, 7 S. E. 915; Davis v. Jackson, 86 Ga. 138, 12 S. E. 299; Railway Co. v. Wideman, 99 Ga. 245, 25 S. E. 400; Moss v. Lovett, 99 Ga. 321, 25 S. E. 649; Thompson v. Waterman, 100 Ga. 586, 28 S. E. 286. In the case last cited, Mr. Justice Cobb remarked, "Where counsel argue their cases In this court by brief alone, If points presented in the record are not insisted on in the brief this court will consider them as abandoned."

The plaintiff in error was, in the county court of Screven county, convicted of a misdemeanor, upon an indictment which had been transferred to that court from the superior court. In his petition for certiorari he alleged that the county judge erred In overruling a demurrer to the indictment, and the answer to the certiorari verifies this allegation. We shall not, however, pass upon the question thus made, because It was not argued In this court. Counsel for the plaintiff in error appeared by brief alone, and in his brief discussed...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Parham v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • January 27, 1908
  • Stephens v. Liquid Carbonic Co.
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • February 10, 1927
    ...properly presented by the record, although not insisted upon in the brief and argument for the plaintiff in error. See Laffitte v. State, 105 Ga. 595(1), 31 S.E. 540, rules 14 and 15 of the Court of Appeals, Civil Code 1910, §§ 6338, 6339. I am of the opinion that there can be no contempt o......
  • Stephens v. Liquid Carbonic Co, (No. 17340.)
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • February 10, 1927
    ...properly presented by the record, although not insisted upon in the brief and argument for the plaintiff in error. See Laffitte v. State, 105 Ga. 595(1), 31 S. E. 540, and rules 14 and 15 of the Court of Appeals, Civil Code 1910, §§ 6338, 6339. 1 am of the opinion that there can be no conte......
  • Caswell v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • January 27, 1909
    ... ... affidavits attempting to set up newly discovered evidence in ... support of the certiorari and the grant of a new trial ... thereunder. Newly discovered evidence cannot be considered on ... the hearing of a certiorari. Almand v. Maxwell, 100 ... Ga. 318, 27 S.E. 176; Laffitte v. State, 105 Ga ... 595, 31 S.E. 540. Counsel for the plaintiff in error makes no ... complaint of this ruling, stating that his only reason for ... the presentation of the affidavits was as inducement or ... additional reason why a new trial should have been granted ... The court below, ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT