Bassett v. Smith
BASSETT v. SMITH, Warden
Opinion
Felton, Justice.
Rule 16 (3) of this court (Code Ann.
§ 24-4516 (3), 221 Ga. 884 ) provides as follows: “The brief of the appellant shall consist of two parts: ... (3) Part one shall contain a statement of each error enumerated. It shall also contain succinct and accurate statements of the issues of law as made by the errors enumerated and shall refer to farts of the record and transcrift of the evidence relied ufon in suffort thereof. Any enumeration of error not thus dealt with will be disregarded.”
(Emphasis supplied).
The judgment of the trial court denying the writ of habeas corpus must be affirmed since the appellant's brief failed to contain references to the record showing the errors specified or the references necessary for a consideration thereof.
Hicks v. Maple Valley Corp., 223 Ga. 577 ( 156 SE2d 904 );
Wallis v. Maddox, 223 Ga. 626 ( 157 SE2d 456 );
Estes v. Perkins, 225 Ga. 268 (2) ( 167 SE2d 588 ).
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.