Ward v. State , 21 Ga. App. 655 ( 1918 )

Bboyles, P. J.

1. The evidence connecting the defendants with the offense charged being entirely circumstantial in its nature, and not excluding every reasonable hypothesis save that of their guilt, their conviction was unauthorized, and the court erred in overruling the motion ■ for a new trial.

2.- The foregoing ruling being controlling in the case, it is unnecessary to consider the amendment to the motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Bloodivorth and Harwell, JJ., concur.