Young v. State
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Hill, C. J.
1. It is only in those cases where the State relies entirely upon circumstantial evidence that it is incumbent upon the trial judge, without request, to instruct the jury as to the probative value of circumstantial evidence. Holt v. State, 7 Ga. App. 77 ( 66 S. E. 279 ); Benton v. State, 9 Ga. App. 422 ( 71 S. E. 498 ). The verdict in this case does not depend entirely upon such evidence.
2. The evidence obtained by an, illegal search of the house of the accused - is admissible against him. This has been repeatedly held by this court and the Supreme Court. Cohen v. State, 7 Ga. App. 5 ( 65 S. E. 1096 ); Hammock v. State, 1 Ga. App. 126 ( 58 S. E. 66 ); Williams v. State, 100 Ga. 511 ( 28 S. E. 624 , 39 L. R. A. 269); Duren v. Thomasville, 125 Ga. 1 ( 53 S. E. 84 ).
3. The assignments of error of law are wholly without merit, and the verdict is fully supported by the evidence. ' 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.