From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Sep 6, 1952
72 S.E.2d 462 (Ga. Ct. App. 1952)

Opinion

34220.

DECIDED SEPTEMBER 6, 1952.

Involuntary manslaughter; from Floyd Superior Court — Judge Nichols. June 14, 1952.

Hicks Culbert, for plaintiff in error.

John W. Davis, Solicitor-General, Robert L. Scoggin, contra.


A brief of evidence is essential to the validity of a motion for a new trial (Code, § 70-301; Herb v. Wolfe, 75 Ga. App. 20 (2), 41 S.E.2d 817; Dobbs v. Sims, 74 Ga. App. 1, 38 S.E.2d 680); and as the statute is imperative, not mentioning any excuse whatever, it contemplates that the movant can and must comply with its terms, irrespective of whether the official reporter has written out his report of the evidence or not ( Vinson v. State, 53 Ga. App. 224, 185 S.E. 529); and where, on trial and conviction of involuntary manslaughter, the defendant made a motion for new trial on October 23, 1950, based solely on the general grounds, which motion was regularly continued from time to time, and, instead of attaching a brief of evidence thereto, the movant appended, on June 14, 1952, "an information" stating that he was unable to prepare a brief of evidence, as the official reporter had failed and refused to transcribe his report of the evidence on the trial and had disappeared from the jurisdiction of the court, this court will not disturb the trial court's refusal to accept the information as an excuse for the absence of the brief of evidence, nor disturb its judgment denying the invalid motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed. Gardner, P.J., and Townsend, J., concur.

DECIDED SEPTEMBER 6, 1952.


Summaries of

Smith v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Sep 6, 1952
72 S.E.2d 462 (Ga. Ct. App. 1952)
Case details for

Smith v. State

Case Details

Full title:SMITH v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Sep 6, 1952

Citations

72 S.E.2d 462 (Ga. Ct. App. 1952)
72 S.E.2d 462

Citing Cases

Satterfield v. Fricks

"A brief of evidence is essential to the validity of a motion for a new trial (Code, § 70-301; Herb v. Wolfe,…

Montgomery v. Hardy Engineering Construction Co.

1. Where a hearing on a motion for a new trial was continued six times and on the date last set for the…