May v. State
| Decision Date | 04 June 1900 |
| Citation | May v. State, 111 Ga. 840, 36 S.E. 222 (Ga. 1900) |
| Parties | MAY v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
Even if the evidence was sufficient to show that the defendant committed the larceny with which she stood charged, a new trial should nevertheless have been granted, because no proof was made of the value of the article alleged to have been stolen, nor of the time at which the larceny was committed.
Error from city court of Brunswick; J. D. Sparks, Judge.
Irena May was convicted of larceny, and brings error. Reversed.
Max Isaac, for plaintiff in error.
J. T. Colson, Sol. pro tem., and J. W. Bennett, Sol. Gen., for the State.
Judgment reversed.
FISH, J., absent on account of sickness.
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
-
Lane v. State
...the judge should have granted a new trial. Hawkins v. State, 95 Ga. 458, 20 S.E. 217; Smith v. State, 95 Ga. 460, 21 S.E. 45; May v. State, 111 Ga. 840, 36 S.E. 222. It does distinctly appear from the evidence for the state exactly what was the relation that existed between the prosecutor a......
-
Moore v. State
...the time when it was stolen. It follows that the conviction was unauthorized, and the refusal to grant a new trial was error. May v. State, 111 Ga. 840, 36 S.E. 222; Lane v. State, 113 Ga. 1040, 39 S.E. 463, and cit. The remaining assignments of error are not passed on. Judgment reversed. M......
- Moore v. State
- May v. State