State v. Laracca
State v. Laracca.
Opinion of the Court
ODOM, J.
Defendant was indicted, tried, and convicted for the larceny of a sum of money from the person of another. He was sentenced to serve not less than three, nor more than five, years at hard labor, and appealed.
There is only one bill of exceptions in the record, which bill was retained to the ruling of the court in refusing to grant a new trial. This bill recites that “the verdict and judgment herein rendered is contrary to the law and the evidence.”
The rule is too well settled in this state to ■ need citátion of authorities to the effect that an appeal to this court solely upon the ground that the verdict of a jury is contrary to the laW and the evidence presents nothing for review.
Aside from the settled jurisprudence to this effect, article 516 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that:
“Neither the appellate nor supervisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court can be invoked to review the granting or the refusal to grant a new trial except for error of law.”
Judgment affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
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.