
    Wallace vs. The State of Georgia.
    1. The verdict in this case is not contrary to law or the evidence.
    2. New trials are not granted for newly discovered evidence where it would not change the verdict, or where it only tends to impeach the witnesses for the state. The newly discovered evidence in this case tended to impeach one of the state’s witnesses and contradict others as to the time when a particular witness was at a particular place, which was not material to locating the spot where the homicide occurred, and the time was a mere matter of opinion and indefinite recollection. Besides, the testimony of the new witness principally relied on was met and overcome by the affidavits of two witnesses showing statements conflicting therewith.
    
      3. Where one ground of a motion for a new trial, to the effect that certain improper expressions had been used by a juror, was supported by the affidavits of two witnesses and absolutely denied by the juror, if the presiding judge passed upon the credibility of the witnesses and believed the statement of the juror, this court will not interfere.
    Judgment affirmed.
    April 24, 1883.
   Crawford, Justice.  